UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Curricular needs of immigrant women in orientational training programs Chen, Lin 1995

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_1995-0329.pdf [ 4.89MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054844.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054844-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054844-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054844-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054844-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054844-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054844-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054844-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054844.ris

Full Text

CURJRICULAR N E E D S O F I M M I G R A N T W O M E N IN O R I E N T A T I O N A L T R A I N I N G P R O G R A M S by L I N C H E N B.A. , Sichuan Institute of Foreign Languages, 1984 A T H E S I S S U B M I T T E D I N P A R T I A L F U L F I L M E N T O F T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R O F A R T S in T H E F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S T H E C E N T R E F O R T H E S T U D Y O F C U R R I C U L U M A N D I N S T R U C T I O N W e accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard T H E U N I V E R S I T Y O F B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A June 1995 © L i n Chen, 1995 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. The Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date June 5 t?ff DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT In training programs designed to help immigrant women adapt to Canada, drop-out rates are frequently high and attendance is often low. Investigating some reasons behind this observation was the motivation for this thesis. A literature review revealed that curricula used in existing programs are often developed from experts' understanding of immigrants' needs; research on immigrant women's curricular needs as perceived by themselves is virtually non-existent. An objective of this thesis was to address this knowledge gap. This study inquired into what curricular needs immigrant women have, how these needs differ, and what relationship exists between the women's backgrounds and their curricular needs. A questionnaire was developed and validated by an expert panel, and then administered to graduates from an orientational training program. Post-survey interviews were conducted. Data were analyzed using frequency distribution, cluster analysis, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), factor analysis, and linear discriminant analysis. It was found that the program, although well received, did not reflect the curricular needs perceived by the immigrant women themselves. Life skills instruction was unwanted by many students while English and computer lessons were in demand. A desire to regain higher-quality jobs partially explained the women's curricular needs. - i i -TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS ii i LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vii A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S viii DEDICATION ix CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION 1 Identification of Problem 4 Purpose of Study 6 Definition of Terms 7 CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW 9 Human Needs and Curriculum 9 Early Studies on Immigrant Education 11 Studies on Immigrant Women 13 Summary 16 CHAPTER III - M E T H O D O L O G Y 17 General Description 17 Sampling Design 18 Instrument Development 19 Instrument Validation 21 Experts' Review 21 Pilot Study 27 Questionnaire Administration 29 Data Analysis 30 Post-Survey Interviews 31 CHAPTER IV - RESULTS A N D DISCUSSION 33 - iii -Background Characteristics of Sample 33 Continent of Origin and Mother Tongue 33 Age . . 35 Marital Status : 35 Number and Age of Children 36 Time in Canada 38 Family Income 40 Work Experience 42 Education 44 Correlation among Background Variables 45 Training Experience 46 Enrolment 47 Problems and Preferences 51 Training Effectiveness 52 Student Satisfaction 54 Curricular Needs 54 Course Reception and Content Needs ; 55 Suggested Changes to Program 56 Data Transformation 58 Cluster Analysis 61 Measures of Dissimilarities 61 Clustering 65 Group Number Determination ...67 Factor Analysis 70 Solution 71 Interpretation 73 Correlation between Backgrounds and Curricular Needs 80 Discriminant Analysis 81 Research Reliability and Validity 88 Interviews 88 Discussion 94 Generalization of Results 95 CHAPTER V - CONCLUSIONS A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S 96 Conclusions 96 Recommendations for Further Studies 99 Recommendations for Stepping Up Program 99 BIBLIOGRAPHY 101 APPENDIX I CONSENT OF IMMIGRANT SERVICES SOCIETY OF B.C. O N C O N D U C T I O N OF THE SURVEY RESEARCH 105 - iv -APPENDIX II COVERING LETTER TO PANEL EXPERTS AND EXPERTS' RE-VIEWING FORM 107 APPENDIX III COVERING LETTER TO SUBJECTS AND QUESTIONNAIRE 120 APPENDIX IV SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE . . . 128 APPENDIX V RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 33 AND 34 131 APPENDIX VI DATA MATRIX USED FOR CLUSTER ANALYSIS .134 - v -LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Summary of Expert Responses to the Rating Form 24 Table 2 Expert Rating Results 25 Table 3 Sample Distribution by Continent of Origin 34 Table 4 Sample Distribution by Mother Tongue 34 Table 5 Sample Distribution by Age Group 35 Table 6 Sample Distribution by Marital Status 36 Table 7 Sample Distribution by Number of Children 37 Table 8 Sample Distribution by Age of Youngest Child 37 Table 9 Sample Distribution by Age of Oldest Child 38 Table 10 Sample Distribution by Time Since Immigration to Canada 39 Table 11 Sample Distribution by Major Source of Income . 41 Table 12 Sample Distribution by Family Income Range . 41 Table 13 Sample Distribution by Work Experience in Home Country 42 Table 14 Sample Distribution by Work Experience in Canada 42 Table 15 Sample Distribution by Job Category before and after Immigration 44 Table 16 Sample Distribution by Highest Level of Education 45 Table 17 Sample Distribution by Waiting Time for Enrolment 47 Table 18 Sample Distribution by Reasons for Entering Stepping Up Program 48 Table 19 Major Influence on Decision to Enter Stepping Up Program . .51 Table 20 Problems Experienced While Attending Stepping Up Program 52 Table 21 Sample Distribution by Preferred Class Schedule 52 Table 22 Sample Distribution by Confidence about Finding a Job 53 Table 23 Sample Distribution by Opinion of Stepping Up Program 53 Table 24 Sample Distribution by Satisfaction Towards Stepping Up Program 54 Table 25 Three Grouping Schemes from Cluster Analysis 67 Table 26 M A N O V A Statistics for Three Different Grouping Schemes 70 Table 27 Varimax-Rotated Principal Component Solution of Six-Factor Model . . . 72 Table 28 Factor Scores by Groups of Subjects 77 Table 29 Results of Three Discriminant Analyses 83 - vi -LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Distribution by Time Since Immigration to Canada 40 Figure 2 Clustering of Subjects by Complete Linkage Using S4 Dissimilarity Matrix . . 66 Figure 3 Six-Factor Profiles of 36 Respondents 75 Figure 4 Plots of Cases (Subjects) in Discriminant Spaces 85 - vii -A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S I would like to extend my sincere thanks to my thesis advisor Dr. Ann Lukasevich and Dr. Florence Pieronek for their enlightening guidance, invaluable suggestions and warm encourage-ments throughout my study. I would also like to express my gratitude to Dr. Walter Werner and Dr. Hillel Goelman for their great advice and support. I thank the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. for its permission for conducting this study on its program, and William Annet, Daisy Quon, and Lily Lim for their kind cooperation. ,1 am grateful to my friends Ivy Morgan, Debbie Riggs, Bruce L i , Bella Cenezero, and Marilyn Waye at the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. for their participation as panel experts and construc-tive comments. I especially wish to thank my parents and my sister who took the responsibility to raise my daughter for five years and persistently gave me spiritual support. Finally, it is impossible to fully thank my husband, who is always a friend, a reader, and a sup-porter of mine. Without his understanding and support, this thesis could never have been completed. - viii -D E D I C A T I O N - ix -CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION Canada is a country populated by immigrants. Over the course of the nation's history, millions of people from all over the world have chosen to live in this land of opportunities. "Excepting only the First Peoples (as the Inuit and the Indians prefer to call themselves), all Canadians are of immigrant origin" (Employment and Immigration Canada, 1991, p. 32). Traditionally, the majority of immigrants came from western and northern Europe. Most of these immigrants were white and spoke either English or French. However, as Canada experi-enced rapid economic growth during the post-war period, Canadian immigration policy, previ-ously based on preferred nations, changed in response to the country's growing demand for labour. By the 1960s, the pattern of immigrant origins had shifted dramatically to Asian, East European, Caribbean, and South American countries. By 1981, approximately four million new immigrants comprised 16% of the Canadian population (Canada's Immigrants, 1984). These immigrants came from cultures different from those of mainstream Canadians and most spoke neither of the official languages. Adjustment to a new life in Canada was a difficult task for them. The Canadian government, advocating multiculturalism in recent decades, has funded a variety of educational programs to facilitate immigrant adaptation. Despite this endeavour by the government, many of these programs are unsuccessful (e.g., Estable, 1986; Seward and McDade, 1988). These programs are designed to fit the decision makers' perceptions of immigrants' adjustment needs; there is a lack of voice from the immigrant learners themselves. In other words, learners' needs as perceived by the learners themselves are ignored within curricula for immigrant education. Multiculturalism implies integration rather than assimilation. One has the right to decide whether or not one wants to adapt, to what extent and at what speed. Immigrants from a wide variety of cultural, social and personal backgrounds have varied learning needs in their adaptation processes. To be able to support themselves and participate in the mainstream Canadian society, some may wish to improve their English or French proficiency; others may want to strengthen their understanding of Canadian society and culture; still others who already have a good mastery of English or French may desire to sharpen their skills to gain satisfactory employment. Some immigrants may wish to accelerate their adaptation process; others may be more comfortable at a slower pace of learning. Educational programs designed to help immigrants adapt must, according to learning and curriculum theories, satisfy the immigrants' heterogeneous learning needs through specially developed, adequate curricula to achieve the best educational outcome. To develop such curricula, knowledge of the varied learning needs of immigrants is a prerequisite. These learning needs are best defined by the immigrant learners themselves rather than by curriculum experts, because (1) no curriculum "expert" is an expert on all cultures and societies; (2) curriculum experts can not experience the every-day difficulties that immigrants do during their varied trajectories of adaptation; and (3) there is a lack of an established body of literature of empirical studies on immigrants' learning needs to which curriculum experts can make reference. Studies on immigrants' learning needs in educational programs designed to help them adapt are scarce; this is especially true when women — a subgroup of immigrants — are con-cerned. This study attempts to fill this knowledge gap by examining the curricular needs of immigrant women in an orientational training program — needs perceived by the immigrant women themselves, and by exploring the relationships between immigrant women's back-grounds and their curricular needs. Fmdings from this study can be used by curriculum workers and educators to improve existing curricula or develop new curricula for immigrant women training programs, to derive admission criteria, and to place incoming students into different classes designed to cater to different curricular needs. This thesis is organized in five chapters. Chapter I introduces general information and identifies the research problem. Chapter II reviews related literature. Chapter III describes the research methodology. Results are presented in Chapter IV. Chapter V summarizes the research findings, suggests further research topics, and recommends improvements to the Stepping Up Program examined in this study. The appendices contain details on the research instrument and some aspects of data analysis. Historically, more men than women immigrated to Canada. In 1911, 158 men arrived for every 100 women. This gender ratio first reversed in 1981 to 98 men to 100 women (Canada's Immigrants, 1984). The pattern in which females outnumbered males in new immigrant arrivals continued through the 1980s and the 1990s (Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 1994). It is generally accepted that immigrant women face much harder difficulties than their male counterparts in the process of adaptation. In spite of the dramatic increase in the number of female immigrants, significant improvement in social and educational services for them has not been seen. In his study on immigrant women in Canada, Estable (1986) remarked that immigration policy in Canada is potentially discriminative against women. For example, many educational programs and social services are provided principally to independent immigrants. However, over 60% of the immigrant women entered Canada through husband sponsorship. They are officially placed in a legally binding position of economic dependence on their hus-band sponsors. Netting (1985) stated, As females from visible minorities, they face both sexual and racial prejudice. Many have limited knowledge of English or French, and are expected by their cultures to be full-time wives and mothers. These disabilities accumulate, leav-ing them unable to join the labour force except on the lowest level, unable to participate in politics, unable to make friends except with others from their own country, (p. 3) At the 1981 National Conference on Immigrant Women in Canada, Mr. Fleming, then the Minister of State Responsible for Multiculturalism, pointed out, "Immigrant women in our society are one of the most exploited groups and are definitely in a disadvantaged class. Ways must be found not only to help immigrant women cope with their new Canadian environment but also to change public attitudes towards them" (Multiculturalism Canada, 1981a, p. 16). Efforts have been made by the federal government to assist the transition of immigrant men and women. For example, over the last decade Employment and Immigration Canada and the Secretary of State have sponsored many ESL (English as a Second Language) classes and other educational programs to accommodate the educational needs of immigrant adults. There have also been a limited number of programs for immigrant women, usually conducted through government agencies. However, dropout rates of immigrant women in these programs are often high. Why does this happen? What are the reasons for this? These questions were the initial impetus of this study. One explanation for the high dropout rate is that the curricula used in these programs do not meet the needs of immigrant women. This hypothesis is shared by Estable (1986), who commented on language framing classes for immigrant women as follows: ...the style of teaching — total immersion — may not always be suitable. Many women drop out of classes because they are unable to ask questions in their own language of unilingual English teachers. The materials used for teaching English and French as a second language have also been criticized as culturally insensi-tive, sexist, and racist. The type of instruction is usually very general. Groups of women with special needs do not have language classes tailored to these needs. For example, women with limited education and literacy skills will not be able to profit from a standard language class. Furthermore, the level of language proficiency achie-ved through these classes is seldom adequate to enable women to find employ-ment. This is particularly difficult for professional women wanting to upgrade their qualifications, or to learn a relatively sophisticated vocabulary required for the practice of their profession, (p. 45) To explore what is a relevant cirrriculum for immigrant women, an investigation of the learners themselves is necessary. The present study responds to this necessity. Purpose of Study Canadians view immigrant women as a homogenous group: they are all newcomers to Canada; they dress somewhat differently from mainstream Canadians; they speak other lan-guages than English or French. This is a myth. Despite their commonness, immigrant women differ fundamentally in many ways. As Seydegart and Spears (1990) observed, Immigration to Canada is a different experience for women who have come from the Punjab, Poland, or Peru. Women who come as physicians or physi-cists may experience the process of settlement and adaptation differently from women who are hairdressers or farmers. Women who arrive to find a large and flourishing community of their compatriots may face a different reality than women from countries that have sent few people to Canada, (p. 31) As immigrant women vary in origin, language, education, race, class, religion, etc., their adaptation needs should be considered separately. It is inappropriate to treat all immigrant women as one group in educational programs. Many training programs for immigrants are created according to decision makers' understanding of the immigrants' problems; there is a lack of input from immigrant women themselves. The Canadian National Conference on Immi-grant Women aired this criticism (Multiculturalism Canada, 1981b): Although various government and institutional programs have been designed to assist newcomers to adjust and integrate, many of these programs have devel-oped in isolation from the groups they are intended to serve. Conference partic-ipants believe it is crucial that immigrant women be included in both the design and the implementation of these programs, (p. 3) - 6 -The conference recommended that "programs developed should have input from those people working in the field as well as from the students themselves" (p. 4), and that teaching materials should "respond to the expressed needs and concerns of the students" (p. 14). This study investigates the curricular needs perceived by immigrant women enroled in an orientational training program. The study also explores how the women's backgrounds influence their curricular needs. Specifically, the study answers the following questions: • What are the immigrant women's major learning needs in the training program? • Wha t are the significant differences in learning needs among them? • How are their backgrounds correlated wi th their learning needs? • How do they view their learning experience? Definition of Terms Some terms used in this study are defined as follows: • Immigrant Women refer to females currently over 18 years of age who originated from non-English speaking countries, who arrived in Canada after 1985, and who are currently citizens or permanent residents of Canada. • Curriculum refers to the integration of content, teaching methods, teaching materials, and students' learning experiences. • Curricular Needs refer to the student-perceived needs in an idealized curriculum, focusing on the difference between the learner-idealized curriculum and the curriculum currently provided. Orientational Training Programs refer to o r ien ta t ion , language and emp loymen t training programs for immigrant women . These programs are in tended to assist new immig ran t w o m e n to adapt to the i r C a n a d i a n l ives. CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW Educators have long been aware of the importance of learners' needs (e.g., Dewey, 1897, 1963; Benjamin, 1939; Tyler, 1949; Knowles, 1970; Silberman, 1971; Jupp & Hodlin, 1975; Zais, 1976; Cress &. Purpel, 1978; Berwick, 1979; Hooper, 1971; Walker & Soltis, 1986; Sharpes, 1988; Kelly, 1989). Tyler (1949), for example, identified "study of learners" (p. 4) as the first source for educational goals. Kerr similarly regarded "information about the level of development of pupils, their needs and interest" as curriculum sources (Hooper, 1971, p. 186). Although the importance of learners' needs has received attention by curriculum workers, studies on curricular needs of immigrant women in training programs are scarce. Consequently, this chapter begins with a brief review of human needs and curriculum, followed by a review of immigrant education in Canada and topics related to immigrant women. Human Needs and Curriculum Humankind are highly integrated organisms capable of responding to their environment in two contrasting modes: (1) with behaviour originating from the physiobiological structure they share with lower forms of life, or (2) with behaviour originating from the more elaborate and highly developed psychobiological structure that is characteristic of the human. The unique second structure which generates conscious meanings or ideas distinguishes humankind from other animals. In accordance with humarikind's dual organismic modes, Maslow set forth his theory of human needs based on a hierarchy. The two lowest levels consist of physiological and safety needs. The higher levels are classified as psychological needs: love and belonging, self-esteem, and self-actualization. According to Maslow, the basic needs are unconscious, and when they are not filled, human behaviour is dominated by the desire to fill them. Zais (1976) explained this deficiency-motivated behaviour: "To the extent that the environment does not permit basic needs to be filled, psychopathology occurs: the individual becomes starved for safety, love or esteem; he perceives himself and the world around him from an extremely limited, narrow and distorted perspective; he behaves neurotically" (p. 221). Zais further stated, As man evolved toward increasingly advanced phases of the psychosocial stage of development, however, actualization of the potential in his sophisticated biological structures enabled him to reduce his subjection to natural forces and to increase his control over his future and the world. Awareness and knowledge of Mmself and his environment enabled him to become a more significant factor in determining the direction and quality of evolution. Thus, human ideas, purposes, opinions, tastes, manners, interests, etc., became increasingly influen-tial determinants in directing the course of events, (p. 212) The needs theory proposes that (1) the unique organismic structure of human beings imposes psychological needs; (2) humankind tend to move towards higher levels of needs when lower levels of needs are filled; and (3) a healthy person (whose needs are satisfied) tends to view environmental situations more objectively and behaves more productively. - 10 -Since higher needs always appear after the lower needs are filled, a learner unsatisfied wi th a certain form of lower-level needs such as safety wi l l not be motivated for a higher pursuit, for example, learning. The implication in the classroom is that teachers should always concern themselves with the learner's needs. The general goal of education is to encourage learners to develop themselves as a whole person, happy and healthy. In the case of immigrant education, the basic goal is "to help immigrants adapt to a new way of life" and "to promote the full participation of immigrants in all aspects of Canadian life — social, economic, cultural and political" (Immigration Canada, 1990, p. 25). Early Studies on Immigrant Education Wardhaugh (1982) reviewed works on immigrant education from the beginning of this century conducted by educators or sociologists (Ames, 1897; Sellar, 1907; Woodsworth, 1909, 1911; Black, 1913; Sissons, 1917; Anderson, 1918; Foght, 1918; Fitzpatick, 1919; England, 1929, etc., all cited by Wardhaugh). Although from different perspectives, they all seriously discussed school goals, curriculum content, instructional method, and teacher resources in relation to immigrants. Anderson (1918), for example, in Education of the New Canadians, analyzed the immigrant influx and its resultant educational problems. Whi le identifying English as the priority need, he particularly discussed ways of instruction. He emphasized "Direct Method", meaning that English alone as the language of instruction was the most effective method in teaching immigrant students. Firmly opposing bilingual language teaching, he claimed that students gained knowledge more rapidly under the English-only instructional - 11 -system. The methodology received a great deal of support from educators and was widely adopted in later immigrant education. England (1929), also supporting this approach, wrote: The Direct Method... the most effective method... requires constant drilling, careful selection of the order of words, close study of expressions and sentences which are likely to become most useful and which make the pupil delight in his new found mastery of a language, and, most important of all, the making of occasions for the use of language, (p. 128) Anderson (1918), also addressing immigrant adult education, suggested the enlargement of night schools which could better meet the needs of working immigrant men and women. Other educators revealed problems in the education of immigrant students at various times: insufficient teacher preparation, irrelevant content, unsuitable textbooks, etc. Black (Wardhaugh, 1982) remarked, The probability is that the teacher will never have received any adequate in-struction bearing upon the teaching of English... Likely enough, the textbooks supplied will be lamentably unsuitable. The subject must then be given definite serious study, and help must be sought in every possible direction, (p. 152) Harney and Troper (Wardhaugh, 1982) further commented later, Night schools often depended on volunteer teachers or community workers. Although these volunteers' were dedicated, few, if any, were trained in the teach-ing of English as a second language. Often teachers were forced to rely on children's books or improvise with such things as flash cards. In many cases students became frustrated with their own slow progress or the rigidity of the classroom study and fell back in learning English as best they could in the street or on the job. (p. 152) In general, studies on immigrant education conducted early this century were focused on English language teaching. They identified problems in immigrant education that we still face today (Wardhaugh, 1982). However, these studies commonly assumed the concept of - 12 -total assimilation, and were directed towards immigrants of European descent. The interests and needs of immigrant students themselves were disregarded, and immigrant women were not treated as a particular group of concern. Studies on Immigrant Women Studies focusing on social aspects of immigrant women appeared in the 1970s. With the number of immigrant females increasing, their corresponding social problems became obvious to the public. Immigrant women were recognized as an oppressed and disadvantaged class. Ghosh (1978) described working immigrant women as being "very exploited, unskilled... unaware of their rights as workers or immigrants... they do not report encountering sexist behaviour" (p. 4). Axworthy, then Minister of Employment and Immigration and Minister of State Responsible for the Status of Women, stated at the National Conference on Immigrant Women in Canada (Multiculturalism Canada, 1981a), The inability to speak English or French brings with it social and family prob-lems. An immigrant woman without this ability cannot take part in her child's activities at school or in extra-curricular events. She may have problems com-municating with doctors and government agencies. She will also be frustrated when she wants to participate in community life in her local environment, at work and in the stores, streets and playgrounds. Her feelings of isolation can develop into emotional problems, (p. 26) Arnopoulos (1978), after a longitudinal survey on the economic and social adaptation of immigrants, concluded, More than any other group, women immigrants are located in the poorly-paid labour market sectors where they work as domestics, chamber maids, building cleaners, dishwashers, waitresses, sewing machine operators and plastics work-ers. Ignored by unions and inadequately protected by provincial labour legisla-- 13 -tion, they occupy the bottom ring of the "vertical mosaic", (p. 1) In a study on the accessibility and relevance of social services to immigrant women in Toronto, Bodnar and Reimer (1978) reported that "current social services and practice were largely irrelevant to immigrant women's problems" (p. 7). They also mentioned that "there is a serious lack of practical, educational, and supportive programs for immigrant women. To date, there are in existence only very few programs that are beginning to address this need" (p. 10). Recent literature on immigrant women largely concentrated on their adjustment needs. Common coping problems identified by researchers include employment, language, and cul-ture. In a study on adaptation needs of new immigrants in Vancouver, Mastai (1980) devel-oped 36 coping tasks. She interviewed 72 Israeli respondents and identified the ten most difficult tasks as "getting a satisfying career-oriented job, speaking good English, using a differ-ent system of sizes, weights and measures; reading a local English language newspaper regu-larly, getting used to a different sense of humour in Canada, finding a permanent place to live, budgeting for life on a different economic level, gaining acceptance of existing occupational qualifications, adjusting to the climate in Vancouver, and accepting a change of status in the community" (p. 80). Netting (1985) conducted a similar research study designed for immi-grant women. She surveyed 201 immigrant women of various nationalities in Kelowna and ranked their greatest adjustment difficulties as learning English language, finding a suitable job, dealing with the Canadian government, making Canadian friends, etc. Findings by - 14 -Bhagavatula (1989) also revealed similar results. She investigated 233 immigrant women in Vancouver and reported the foremost difficulties they experienced after arrival in Canada to be finding a satisfying job, learning a new language, adapting to the culture, and so on. Based on their findings, Mastai (1980) and Petersen (1986) both promoted further study of educa-tional needs. Few researchers have dealt with the curriculum-related problems in educational training programs for immigrant women. A national study conducted by Seydegart and Spears (1990) investigated the performance of CILT (Citizenship and Language Instruction Agreement and Language Textbook Agreement) and CEIC (Canadian Employment and Immigration Centre) training programs as a part of their research to develop an action plan for both the government and immigrant women groups. Based on interviews of 205 immigrant women workers and government representatives, they critically concluded: The structure of the CEIC course, which consists of 24 weeks of full-time clas-ses, is unsuitable for many women. Work, family responsibilities, and full-time school are too much... the content of many language courses does not accom-modate the diverse needs of students. The standard course assumes that learn-ing is the same for all students. However, several factors are critical in a stu-dent's ability to learn English or French: the student's familiarity with the Latin alphabet, rather than ideograms, or other alphabets such as Cyrillic or Arabic; the phonetic and syntactic similarity of the student's native tongue to English; the student's level of literacy and education in their native tongue; and the student's goals in language learning, such as conversational fluency or compe-tence in technical subjects... language courses teach language in isolation from the skills required to integrate into Canadian culture. The curriculum thereby puts at a disadvantage immigrant women from cultures very different from that of Canada, (p. 39) - 15 -The same problems associated with the CEIC course structure, curriculum content and organization were also identified by Seward and McDade (1988), who stated, "...existing programs fail to meet the needs of many immigrant women. The organization of classes on a fun-time basis is a problem for all women given the labour they perform at home... the content of the curriculum and organization of the classroom exclude the specific experiences of immi-grant women and in so doing, they fail to address the needs arising from them" (p. 25). Summary This literature review reveals the following limitations in research on immigrant woman: • Early studies on immigrant education were centred on English language educa-tion, assumed an assimilation goal, and were directed towards West European immigrants. • Although there is a growing attention on immigrant needs and multicultural education, empirical work on the education of immigrant women and their curricular needs is rare. • Most studies on immigrant women have explored social needs, and thus provide only indirect information on educational needs. • There is inadequate input from immigrant women in curriculum development for training programs. Perceptions of immigrant women's curricular needs are based on experts' understanding of immigrants in general. • There is a lack of correlational studies. For example, very few studies examine the effect of socio-demographic factors on female immigrants' learning needs. - 16 -CHAPTER III - M E T H O D O L O G Y The basic assumption for this study is that immigrant women's learning needs are not adequately reflected in the curricula adopted in educational training programs. Curricula used for immigrant women training are based on decision makers' or experts' perceptions on immi-grants' adaptation problems not specific to women. This study attempts to clarify the learning needs of immigrant women by gathering information from the women students themselves. A questionnaire survey was chosen to achieve the research goals. Post-survey interviews were used to verify the reliability and validity of the research. This chapter discusses methodology used in instrument development, sample selection, data collection, interview administration, and result interpretation. General Description The research vehicle chosen for this study was a survey questionnaire. A n availability (or convenient) sample was used to collect information on the backgrounds, training experi-ence, and curricular needs of immigrant women. Instrument development entailed initial questionnaire item development and validation by expert reviews and pilot tests. The data collected were analyzed using frequency distributions and histograms, cluster analysis, multi-- 17 -variate analysis of variance (MANOVA) , factor analysis, correlation coefficients, and discriminant analysis. Examination of research reliability and validity involved conducting personal interviews after completion of the questionnaire survey. Sampling Design Immigrant women identified as graduates from the Stepping Up Program at the Immi-grant Services Society of British Columbia from May 1992 to September 1993 were targeted for the survey. Availability sampling was adopted, involving 68 graduates from the Stepping Up Program. The Stepping Up Program for immigrant women was a three-month certificate training program funded by the Ministry of Education and Ministry Responsible for Multiculturalism and Human Rights in British Columbia. It offered full-time study to immigrant females and aimed at reducing their adjustment difficulties. Courses concentrated on cultural orientation, life skills, and employment-seeking skills. Admission to the program was discretional and depended on the suitability of the applicant to the program evaluated on criteria such as length of time in Canada, personal experience, adjustment ability, English level, etc. Students enroled in this program originated from many parts of the world: Albania, China, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Hong Kong, India, Iran, Mexico, Nicaragua, Poland, Philippines, Russia, Srilanka, Somalia, Taiwan, Vietnam, and so on. Most women were new in Canada, living in the country for from five months to two years. Their English proficiency was varied, but generally ranged from upper beginning to intermediate levels. - 18 -The reason for choosing the women from the Stepping Up Program was that they entailed all basic characteristics of immigrant women. Furthermore, as they were all trained in one program, they were easy to sample. Although the targeted sample consisted of the whole population of the program graduates at the time of the study, we still refer to it as a sample. This is because the subjects are considered representatives of a large population of immigrant women who potentially need training in similar programs. Convenient sampling has been identified by McMillan and Schumacher ( 1989 ) as the most commonly used methodol-ogy in educational research due to its effectiveness and inexpensiveness. While warning the researchers to be cautious in generalizing the results, they advise researchers to "describe the subjects carefully to show that although they were not selected randomly from a larger popula-tion, the characteristics of the subjects appear representative of much of the population" (p. 161) . Instrument Development The opinion of each sample student was gathered through a questionnaire. As there was no relevant existing inventory, it was necessary to develop an instrument specifically for this study. After the original draft questionnaire was developed, it was validated by means of expert examination and a pilot study. Considerable time and effort were devoted to this work. Based on the specific research questions, the principles of the questionnaire were first outlined: the questionnaire would (1) gather socio-demographic information of each subject; (2) reveal the subject's training experience; (3) gather information on curricular needs as - 19 -perceived by the subject; and (4) allow descriptive and quantitative exploration of variables. The generation of instrument items included the following components: 1. Observations of, and individual and group discussions with, immigrant women. T o observe and listen to immigrant women students, the researcher participated in training activities involving immigrant women, such as the following workshops: Stress Manage-ment, Assertiveness, Theatre Forum, and Job Seeking Strategies, all organized by Family Counselling and Employment Counselling at the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. Discussions on the topic of women's training needs were arranged with volunteer participants. Notes were taken from these activities. 2. A literature review. Previous work done by Mastai (1980), Netting (1985), Petersen (1986), Bhagavatula (1989) and others provided resources for the formulation of the questionnaire. For example, when studying the adaptation of Israeli immigrants to Vancouver, Mastai (1980) developed 36 adjustment tasks which helped identify the learning needs of immigrant women in this study. 3. Advice from immigrant women workers — one counsellor, one program manager, and one instructor. They identified salient problems they encountered in working with immigrant women and recommended variables for inclusion in the questionnaire. - 20 -A draft questionnaire was developed from the above sources. It contained three sec-tions, with Section I inquiring about background information, Section II focusing on training experience, and Section III concentrating on curriculum needs of the respondents. Thirty-three question items were generated. Many questions made use of checldist items, whereas other questions were based on multiple choice. A five-point Lickert scale was used when the degree of satisfaction or agreement.was measured. A few open-ended questions were asked, allowing the respondent to provide her own thoughts. Instrument Validation Instrument validation was aimed at increasing the reliability and the validity of the questionnaire. It consisted of an experts' review and a pilot study. Experts' Review The concern for instrument validity was content representativeness and item appropri-ateness. The concern for reliability was simplicity and understandability of the language used in the questionnaire. Professional judgment and advice were sought in these areas. A n expert panel was assembled to assess the instrument. The expert panel included seven members: (1) a professor specializing in curriculum and content instruction (2) a program director at an immigrant agency (3) a facilitator from a Canadian Job Strategy Program (4) a coordinator involved in an immigrant women training program (5) an instructor working with immigrant women - 21 -(6) an immigrant women counsellor (7) an employment counsellor and program manager The draft questionnaires were sent to all members of the expert panel for review. Each member was required to examine the relevance of question items to the educational needs of immigrant women by rating each item independently. A four-point Likert scale was employed to indicate the degree of relevance (1 = not relevant, 2 = slightly relevant, 3 = relevant, 4 = very relevant). Each member was also asked to identify items which she or he felt were confus-ing or inappropriate, and to suggest improvement in wording. A rating package was prepared for each panel member which contained (1) a covering letter explaining the purpose and importance of the research and requesting the expert's review of the questionnaire; (2) an experts' reviewing form containing all items in the draft question-naire and spaces for ratings, comments and suggestions; and (3) a stamped, self-addressed return envelop. The covering letter and the experts' reviewing form are found in Appendix II. The criteria for retaining, revising or rejecting a question item are based on mean ratings from the panel members, as used by Brawley (1988). An item is retained if its mean rating is greater than or equal to 2.75. An item is rephrased if it meets the criterion for retention but two or more experts suggest rewording. A retained item is rejected if it has a mean rating less than 2.75. A new item is added if two or more experts suggest the same addition. - 22 -The rating packages were sent to panel members in November 1993; all seven copies were returned after one month. The experts' responses are summarized in Table 1, and the detailed ratings, recommended changes, and actions taken to improve the questionnaire are listed by item in Table 2. Al l original question items received a mean score greater than 2.75, so all were retained (Table 2). Twenty-two questions were rephrased as similar changes were advised by two or more experts. One item was added because two experts felt it was important to ask the respondents if they would recommend the program to other people. Another two items remained unchanged, although changes had been recommended by two judges. This was because the recommended changes were different in nature. For example, one expert advised to replace the word "enrol" with "sign up for" in item 15. The other suggested changing "self-fulfilment" to "self-esteem". Both items are marked with an asterisk ("*") in Table 2. Items 3 and 14 (marked by double asterisks, "**") were rephrased, although only one expert advised the changes, because the researcher considered the advice very reasonable. For example, item 3 was originally phrased as "What is your age?" One expert provided "How old are you?" in substitution and it was adopted. - 23 -Table 1 Summary of Expert Responses to the Rating Form Expert No. Recommended Changes Comments Rephrasing Deletion Addition 1 13 0 0 Plain English language should be used for easy understanding by immigrant students. 2 14 0 1 Previous socio-economic status should be surveyed in relation to different train-ing needs. 3 2 1 2 Be aware of asking sensitive questions such as family income and gender prefer-ences. Ask if subject would recommend the program to others. 4 11 2 • 4 Use easy words. Arrange question choices in alphabetical order. Ask why students liked or disliked the program. 5 8 0 1 Maybe worthwhile to separate refugees from independent immigrant students because they have different needs. 6 0 0 0 Questions are well prepared and orga-nized. 7 6 0 1 Use easy and proper words. Add a ques-tion to ask if students would like to refer the program to a friend. Total 54 3 9 - 24 -Table 2 Expert Rating Results (Number of Experts = 7, Question Number Refers to the Old Questionnaire) Question No. of Persons Recommending Changes Mean Action No. Rephrasing Deletion Total Scores Score Taken #1 2 4+4+4+4+4+4+4=28 4.00 Rephrased #2 3 4+4+4+4+4+4+4=28 4.00 Rephrased #3 1" 4+4+4+3+3+4+4=26 3.71 Rephrased" #4 2 4+4+3+2+2+4+4=23 3.29 Rephrased #5 . 2* 4+4+4+2+2+4+4=24 3.43 Retained* #6 4+4+3+3+2+4+4=24 3.43 Retained #7 1 3+4+4+3+4+4+2=24 3.43 Retained #8 3 4+4+4+3+3+4+2=24 3.43 Rephrased #9 1 1 1+4+4+3+3+4+4=23 3.29 Retained #10 1 4+4+4+3+4+4+3=26 3.71 Retained #11 2 ' 4+4+4+3+4+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #12 • 2 4+4+4+3+4+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #13 3 4+4+4+3+4+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #14 1" 4+4+4+4+3+4+2=25 3.57 Rephrased" #15 . 2* 4+4+4+4+3+4+4=27 3.86 Retained* #16 3 4+4+4+3+2+4+2=23 3.29 Rephrased #17 2 4+4+4+3+2+4+4=25 3.57 Rephrased #18 2 4+4+4+4+2+4+4=26 3.71 Rephrased #19 2 4+4+4+3+3+4+3=25 3.57 Rephrased #20 2 4+4+4+4+3+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #21 2 4+4+4+4+3+4+3=26 3.71 Rephrased #22 2 4+4+4+4+3+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #23 5 4+3+4+4+2+4+4=25 3.57 Rephrased #24 1 3+4+4+4+4+4+4=27 3.86 Retained #25 1 3+4+4+2+4+4+4=25 3.57 Retained #26 2 4+4+4+2+2+4+4=24 3.43 Rephrased #27 1 3+4+4+4+4+4+4=27 3.86 Retained - 25 -Question No. No. of Persons Recommending Changes Total Scores Mean Score Action Taken Rephrasing Deletion #28 2 3+4+4+4+3+4+4=26 3.71 Rephrased #29 2 4+4+4+3+4+4+4=27 3.86 Rephrased #30 2 1 4+3+3+1+1+4+4=22 2.86 Rephrased #31 1 3+4+4+3+2+4+4=24 3.43 Retained #32 1 1 1+4+4+2+3+4+4=22 3.14 Retained #33 2 4+4+4+3+3+4+4=26 3.71 Rephrased Recommended Additions Action Taken 1. Ask if the length of the program is long enough (Suggested by 1 person). None 2. What did the students like the most about the program (Suggested by 1 person). None 3. What didn't the students like about the pro-gram (Suggested by 1 person). None 4. Ask if students would refer the program to their friends (Suggested by 2 persons). Recommendation followed 5. Separate the gender of correspondents' chil-dren (Suggested by 1 person). None 6. Find out the socio-economic status of stu-dents in their home country (Suggested by 1 person). None 7. Inquire if the students ever felt uncomfort-able during the program, and if yes, when and why (Suggested by 1 person). None Summary: Retained: A l l the questions Rephrased: 22 questions Rejected: None of the questions Added: 1 question Rules for Modification of Questions: 1. Rephrasing: if two or more experts suggest rephrasing the same question for similar reasons, or if one expert suggests rephrasing which in the researcher's judgement is advis-able. 2. Rejecting: if mean score of a question is less than 2.75. 3. Retaining: if mean score of a question is greater than or equal to 2.75. 4. Adding: if two or more experts suggest the same addition. Two recommended changes on the same question were very different in nature, therefore the original phrasing was retained. Although the change was recommended by only one person, the question was nevertheless rephrased because the researcher felt the change was advisable. - 26 -A n overwhelming response from the panel experts was an emphasis on "using plain language". Revision of the items has particularly reflected this concern. Among all the 22 rephrased statements, 14 were reworded by using simpler and clearer words or phrases. For example, item 1 was originally written as "What is your birth place?" It was replaced by "Where are you from?" Item 7 was originally stated as "Write down when you immigrated to Canada." This was shortened to "When did you immigrate to Canada?" Item 21 was previ-ously worded as "What are your plans upon completion of the program?" It was changed to "What do you want to do after you finish the program?" Other changes include relisting country and language choices in alphabetic order and substitution of some uncomfortable words, such as "social assistance" for "welfare" and "Filipino" for "Tagalog". The revision of the items using plain, simple English enhanced the reliability of the instrument. Simpler English ensured a better understanding of the questions by respondents whose English proficiency was limited; as a result, the accuracy of their answers increased. The validity of the instrument was assured by the fact that a majority of the experts gave high ratings to most of the questionnaire items on their content appropriateness and relevance to the research, resulting in a 100% retention rate. The experts' assessment resulted in a revised questionnaire with 34 question items, which was subjected to a pilot test. Pilot Study A pilot study was used to test the reliability of the instrument, i.e., students' under-standing of the directions and questions. Five women were selected to participate in the pilot - 27 -test. These women came from China, El Salvador, Philippines, Poland and Vietnam. They were believed to have similar characteristics to the target population. Two of the subjects were chosen during a workshop for immigrant women hosted by Family Counselling at the Immi-grant Services Society of B.C. The other three were previous applicants to the Stepping Up Program and their names were provided by the program instructor. After an explanation of the research and the pilot test, all five women agreed to participate. The pilot test was carried out in a classroom at the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. in January 1994, approximately one week prior to the initial contacts of the sample group. Modifications were made to the questionnaire as a result of the pilot test. One women asked about the meaning of the word "enrol" in item 15. Since this difficulty was in accordance with the prediction of an expert (as only one expert suggested rewording, it was not reworded), this word was replaced by "enter". The Vietnamese woman suggested adding "Vietnamese" as one of the choices in item 2 "What is your first language?" She explained that although she could identify her origin by choosing "Vietnam" in question 1 (Where are your from?), a correspond-ing choice was not provided in question 2, and she felt uncomfortable about this. This mistake was corrected in the final version. The Chinese woman suggested that the three choices of China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan in question 1 be amalgamated as "China". She said that, although the country was politically divided, Chinese culture was the same. This suggestion was not adopted, as the author consulted several other Chinese immigrants who believed that different social systems could result in different curricular needs. The pilot test lasted approxi-mately 50 minutes. None of the participants had other difficulties in following directions and - 28 -understanding the meanings of the questions. The questionnaire, finalized following the pilot study, is included in Appendix III along with the final covering letter to the subjects. Questionnaire Administration Mailed questionnaires were used for data collection. A letter of permission was ob-tained from the Immigrant Services Society of B.C. prior to commencement of the study (Appendix I). Two follow-ups were scheduled after the initial mailing of the questionnaires for those subjects who did not return completed questionnaires promptly. A mailing list containing names, telephone numbers and addresses of the 68 women was obtained from the Stepping Up Program. The initial telephone contacts were conducted in mid-January of 1994. Forty-eight women were reached by telephone. Being briefly informed of the research, 45 of the women agreed to participate in the survey; three refused. Forty-five copies of the questionnaire, each accompanied by a covering letter and a stamped, self-ad-dressed return envelope, were mailed. A l l the questionnaires were coded for the purpose of follow-up. The covering letter (see Appendix III) explained the intention of the study and the importance of the respondent's opinions. The value of her response to future improvement of the curriculum used in immigrant women training programs was emphasized. Participants were assured of the confidentiality of their responses and were asked to return their independently finished questionnaires in ten days. A clause stating participation was voluntary was also included, and an acknowledgment was made of the respondent's contribution to the study. - 29 -Twenty-five completed questionnaires were returned from the initial mailing within two weeks. A follow-up of non-respondents was carried out two weeks after the initial mailing. The 20 non-respondents identified from the coding were telephoned. Three women indicated that they had not received the questionnaire and the others replied that they would finish the questionnaire soon. Twenty follow-up packages containing the same questionnaires, covering letters and stamped return envelopes were mailed. Nine more finished questionnaires were received in the following two weeks. A second follow-up was performed on the remaining eleven non-respondents; eleven replacement questionnaire packages were mailed, which brought in another two returns. A total of 36 completed questionnaires were returned as a result of the three mailings, giving an overall response rate of 80%. Data Analysis Data from the questionnaires were compiled in a computer spreadsheet. Depending on their nature, question items were converted to variables of different scales (nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio). The checklist questions in Section III of the questionnaire (curricular needs perceptions) were treated in a special way to facilitate statistical analysis: they were coded into binary variables (See Data Transformation section for details). Frequency tables and histograms were used to present the data collected with Section I (Background Information) and Section II (Training Experience). Special patterns in the frequency distributions were noted and underlying reasons explored. Interdependence among background variables was examined by means of a Pearson's correlation matrix. - 3 0 -The data collected with Section III (Curricular Needs Perceptions) were treated differ-ently. After transformation of the question items into binary variables, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed to detect natural grouping of subjects according to their curricular needs. Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to test the statistical signifi-cance of the differences among the resulting groups (clusters). Then a factor analysis was conducted to delineate common underlying curricular needs factors. The common factors identified were then used to re-examine the natural grouping revealed by the earlier cluster analysis. The correlation between background variables and curricular needs factors as well as curricular needs group status was then explored. Finally, linear discriminant analyses were performed to derive rules of assigning subjects into one of the three observed natural groups (clusters) on the basis of (1) the six curricular needs factors alone; (2) the background variables alone; and (3) the six curricular needs factors and two background variables. Post-Survey Interviews After the questionnaire survey was completed, face-to-face interviews were conducted to check the reliability and validity of the research. The reliability of the research was exam-ined by comparing the answers of the subjects in the questionnaire survey with those during the interviews. The validity was assessed by looking at the accuracy of the statistical data interpretation in describing the reality revealed by the in-depth interviews. Ten of the questionnaire respondents chosen at random were contacted by phone. Four women agreed to be interviewed and thus were selected. The interviews took place in March - 31 -1994 at respondents' homes at their request and each lasted for about one hour. A semi-structured interview schedule was used (Appendix IV). Some questions duplicated those in the questionnaire for checking the research reliability; others were intended to confirm the validity of the research by probing the respondents' backgrounds, short and long-term goals, home country,and Canadian work experience, particular learning needs, reasons for the perceived learning needs, and so on. Notes were taken during the interviews. - 32 -CHAPTER IV - RESULTS A N D DISCUSSION Background Characteristics of Sample One of the objectives of this study was to investigate possible correlations between the backgrounds of the subjects and their curricular needs. The subjects' background information included origin, mother tongue, age, marital status, number and age of children, time in Can-ada since immigration, source and level of family income, work experience, and education. These are discussed below with frequency distribution tables and histograms. Continent of Origin and Mother Tongue The frequency distribution by origin was calculated on the basis of "continent of origin" rather than "country of origin", as shown in Table 3. If the frequency distribution table had been constructed by "country of origin", there would have been too few subjects in some coun-tries of origin because of the relatively small sample size. Grouping by "continent" generated meaningful associations of similar cultures. Table 3 shows that the largest group comes from Asia (52.8%), followed by Europe (27.8%), South America (16.7%), and Africa (2.8%). Table 4 shows the sample breakdown - 33 -by mother tongue. Chinese (Cantonese and Mandarin) speakers constitute the largest group, accounting for 25% of the sample, followed by Polish (19.4%) and Spanish (16.7%) speakers. Table 3 Sample Distribution by Continent of Origin (N = 36) Continent Cumulative Cumulative of Origin Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Africa 1 2.8 1 2.8 South America 6 16.7 7 19.4 Asia 19 52.8 26 72.2. Europe 10 27.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Table 4 Sample Distribution by Mother Tongue (N = 36) Mother Cumulative Cumulative Tongue Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Albanian 1 2.8 1 2.8 Amharic 1 2.8 2 5.6 Cantonese 6 16.7 8 22.2 Farsi 1 2.8 9 25.0 Filipino 1 2.8 10 27.8 Indonesian 1 2.8 11 30.6 Mandarin 3 8.3 14 38.9 Persian 3 8.3 17 47.2 Polish 7 19.4 24 66.6 Russian 2 5.6 26 72.2 Spanish 6 16.7 32 88.9 Tamil 1 2.8 33 91.7 Vietnamese 3 8.3 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 - 34 -Age The sample distribution by age group is shown in Table 5. There is a wide span of age among the subjects (from under 20 to over 50), with the median age group occurring at 31-35 years (33.3% of total). Table 5 Sample Distribution by Age Group (N = 36) Age Group Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage 20 and Under 2 5.6 2 5.6 21-25 4 11.1 6 16.7 26-30 6 . 16.7 12 33.3 31-35 12 33.3 24 66.7 36-40 5 13.9 29 80.6 41-45 1 2.8 30 83.3 46-50 5 13.9 35 97.2 51-55 1 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Median Age: (31-35) Marital Status Table 6 shows the sample distribution by marital status. Married women by far are the largest group, accounting for 63.9%. One interesting observation is that, although the status "common law" was provided in the questionnaire, no woman claimed that status. - 35 -Table 6 Sample Distribution by Marital Status (N = 36) Marital Status Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Single 8 22.2 8 22.2 Married 23 63.9 31 86.1 Common-Law 0 0 31 86.1 Separated 2 5.6 33 91.7 Widowed 2 5.6 35 97.2 Divorced 1 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Number and Age of Children The number and age of children may influence the curricular needs of immigrant women. Tables 7, 8, and 9 present the sample distributions by number of children, by age of youngest child(ren), and by age of oldest child(ren), respectively. It was found that 36.6% of the women surveyed do not have any children; 27.8% have one child; and 22.2% have two children. Among the women who have at least one child, 34.7% have their youngest child in the 4-6 year age group; 21.8% in the 7-12 group; 17.4% in the 13-17 group, and 17.4% in the 3 and under group. The median age of their youngest child is 4-6 years. Among the same women (who have at least one child), 30.4% have their oldest child in the 4-6 year age group; 26.1% in the 13-17 group; 21.8% in the 18 and over group; and 17.4% in the 3 and under group. The median age of their oldest child is 4-6 years. - 36 -Table 7 Sample Distribution by Number of Children (N = 36) Number of Child(ren) Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage 0 13 36.6 13 36.1 1 10 27.8 23 63.9 2 8 22.2 31 86.1 3 4 11.1 35 97.2 4 1 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Mean: 1.17 Standard Deviation: 1.13 Median: 1.00 Table 8 Sample Distribution by Age of Youngest Child (N = 36) Age (Years) of Youngest Child Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage No Child 13 36.1 13 36.1 3 and Under 4 11.1 17 47.2 4-6 8 22.2 25 69.4 7-12 5 13.9 30 83.3 13-17 4 11.1 34 94.4 18 and Over 2 5.6 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Median: 4-6 Tab le 9 Sample D i s t r i b u t i o n by Age of O ldes t C h i l d ( N = 36) Age (Years) of Oldest C h i l d Frequency Percentage C u m u l a t i v e Frequency C u m u l a t i v e Percentage N o C h i l d 13 36.1 13 36.1 3 a n d U n d e r 4 11.1 17 47 .2 4-6 7 19.4 2 4 66 .7 7-12 1 2.8 25 69 .4 13-17 6 16.7 31 86.1 18 and Over 5 13.9 36 100.0 T o t a l •36 100.0 M e d i a n : 4-6 Time in Canada A s t ime i n C a n a d a increases, immig ran t w o m e n may refine the i r perceptions of w h a t is required of them to be able to make a good l iving; this reflection of the i r needs may be l i nked to their curricular needs i n an orientational training program such as the S tepp ing U p Program. Tab le 10 and Figure 1 show the d i s t r ibut i on of the sample accord ing to the t ime they have been i n C a n a d a since the i r immigra t i on . The t ime varies between 14 and 111 months , w i t h the major i ty o f subjects be ing i n C a n a d a for 1 to 4 years. T h e med i an number of months i n C a n a d a is 27 (2 years a n d 3 months ) . - 38 -Table 10 Sample D i s t r i b u t i o n b y T i m e Since Immigra t i on to C a n a d a ( N = 36) T i m e i n C a n a d a (Months ) Frequency Percentage C u m u l a t i v e Frequency Cumu la t i v e Percentage 14 1 2.8 1 2.8 15 2 5.6 3 8.3 16 2 5.6 5 13.9 17 1 2.8 6 16.7 18 1 2.8 7 1.9.4 20 3 8.3 10 27 .8 21 1 2.8 11 30 .6 22 2 5.6 13 36.1 2 4 1 2.8 14 38 .9 25 1 2.8 15 41 .7 26 2 5.6 17 47 .2 27 4 11.1 21 58 .3 29 1 2.8 22 61.1 3 0 2 5.6 24 66 .7 32 1 2.8 25 69 .4 3 4 3 8.3 28 77.8 36 1 2.8 29 80 .6 38 1 2.8 3 0 83 .3 41 1 2.8 31 86.1 42 1 2.8 32 88 .9 51 1 2.8 33 91 .7 52 2 5.6 35 97 .2 111 1 2.8 36 100.0 T o t a l 36 100.0 M e a n : 30 .3 S tandard Dev i a t i on : 17.3 M e d i a n : 27 .0 - 39 -r 1 0 n ~8 r n _ 4 ~n n " 2 i — — — — i — — — — — — i — — 1 1— — — i — 0 24 48 72 96 120 MONTHS IN CANADA Figure 1 Distribution by Time Since Immigration to Canada Family Income Family income may bear important relationships with curricular needs. Tables 11 and 12 present the distributions by major source of family income and by total family income range, respectively. Inspection of the two tables reveals some interesting observations. First, only 25% of the respondents listed employment (of themselves) as a major source of family income; the remaining 75% are dependent on others. It should not be surprising, then, if we later find that employment-related skills and knowledge are among predominant learning needs. Second, the family income levels of the respondents are quite low — 81% of the respon-dents' families have a total family income less than $25,000, with the median family income 0.25 0.20 I I 0.10 0.05 - 40 -falling in the $15,000 - $20,000 range. Considering that the median family of our sample consists of a married couple and a child, the average income per family member would be $5,000 - $6,600. Table 11 Sample Distribution by Major Source of Income (N = 36) Major Source Cumulative Cumulative of Income Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Employment 9 25.0 9 25.0 Spouse 10 27.8 19 52.8 Relatives 4 11.1 23 63.9 Welfare 10 27.8 33 91.7 AAP* 3 8.3 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 * Adjustment Assistance Program for Canadian government sponsored refugees Table 12 Sample Distribution by Family Income Range (in $K) (N = 36) Family Income Cumulative Cumulative Range Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage No Response 2 5.6 2 5.6 Under 10 9 25.0 11 30.6 10-14.9 6 16.7 17 47.2 15-19.9 8 22.2 25 69.4 20-24.9 4 11.1 29 80.6 25-29.9 4 11.1 33 91.7 30-39.9 1 2.8 34 94.4 40-49.9 2 5.6 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Median: 15-19.9 - 41 -Work Experience A majority of the respondents (91.7%) worked in their home countries before immigra-tion to Canada (Table 13). In contrast, over half of the respondents (52.8%) have never worked in Canada (Table 14). Table 13 Sample Distribution by Work Experience in Home Country (N = 36) Worked in Home Country Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage No Response 2 5.6 2 5.6 Yes 33 91.7 35 . 97.2 No 1 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Table 14 Sample Distribution by Work Experience in Canada (N = 36) Worked in Canada Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Yes 17 47.2 17 47.2 No 19 52.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Two items (Questions 11 and 12) compare the nature of employment held by the respondents in their home countries and in Canada. Al l jobs are assigned to one of four catego-ries: - 42 -1. Group 1: babysitter, cashier, cook, dressmaker, hairdresser, housekeeper, labourer, salesperson, waitress. 2. Group 2: bookkeeper, office clerk, secretary, school clerk, typist. 3. Group 3: craftsperson, draftperson, nurse, technician. 4. Group 4: accountant, counsellor, medical doctor, engineer, scientist, teacher, supervi-sor, program coordinator, government officer. The above four categories are constructed so that from group 1 to group 4, remunera-tion increases. Because of the variation in the countries of origin of the respondents, the above generalization may lack universality. For ease of interpretation, however, such a universality is assumed. Table 15 contrasts the kinds of jobs that correspondents held in their home countries with those in Canada. Fewer respondents held Canadian jobs than home-country jobs because of the higher unemployment rate of the sample in Canada. In addition, each respondent may report several jobs so that the total number of jobs do not equal the number of persons having worked, either in Canada or in the respondents'home countries. Table 15 vividly demonstrates the down-grading of the quality of jobs held by the respondents after immigration: 28.8% of the home-country jobs reported (Group 4) are profes-sional or management jobs; this percentage drops to 5.7% after immigration to Canada. Similarly, the percentages of Group 3 and Group 2 jobs decrease from 4.5% and 28.8% to 0.0% and 8.6%, respectively. The higher-quality home-country jobs are replaced by lower-quality service jobs (Group 1) in Canada: as high as 85.7% of the jobs held by respondents in - 43 -Canada are of a service nature (not to mention the 52.8% of respondents who have never worked in Canada). Table 15 Sample Distribution by Job Category before and after Immigration (N = 36) Job Category Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Home-Country Jobs before Immigration to Canada Group 1 25 37.9 25 37.9 Group 2 19 28.8 44 66.7 Group 3 3 4.5 47 • 71.2 Group 4 19 28.8 66 100.0 Total 66 100 Canadian Jobs after Immigration Group 1 30 85.7 30 85.7 Group 2 3 8.6 33 94.3 Group 3 0 0 33 94.3 Group 4 2 5.7 35 100.0 Total 35 100.0 Education Table 16 shows the sample distribution by highest level of education. The respondents are relatively well educated: 50% of the sample report college or university education; only 8.3% report a level of education below secondary school. The median level falls between technical school and college education. - 44 -Table 16 Sample Distribution by Highest Level of Education (N = 36) Highest Level of Education Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Primary 3 8.3 3 8.3 Secondary 8 22.2 11 30.6 Technical School 7 19.4 18 50.0 College 8 22.2 26 72.2 University 10 27.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Median: Technical School - College Correlation among Background Variables In subsequent statistical analyses, most background variables are treated as independent variables. To test whether correlations exist among the background variables, the Spearman's correlation coefficient matrix of the seven ordinal variables are calculated, as shown below: Q3 Q5 Q6(l) Q6(2) Q7 Q9 Q13 Q3 1.000 Q5 0.300 1.000 Q6(l) 0.467 0.761 1.000 Q6(2) 0.459 0.818 0.978 1.000 • Q7 0.050 0.357 0.380 0.404 1.000 Q9 0.089 -0.252 -0.327 -0.303 0.092 1.000 Q13 0.104 -0.330 -0.146 -0.191 -0.204 -0.030 1.000 The correlation matrix reveals five pairs of variables with relatively large correlation coefficients (underlined). The largest, almost perfect positive correlation (p =0.978) is between - 45 -Q6(l) , age group of youngest child(ren) and Q6(2), age group of oldest child(ren): families having their youngest child(ren) in an older age group also have their oldest child(ren) in an older age group. There are also large positive correlations between Q5 and Q6(l) (p=0.761), and between Q5 and Q6(2) (p=0.818). That is, families having greater number of children tend to have both their youngest and oldest children in higher age groups. Moderate positive correlations exist between the age of the respondents, Q3, and the age of their youngest and oldest child(ren), Q6( 1) and Q6(2) (p = 0.467 and 0.459, respectively). This means that older respondents tend to have both their youngest and their oldest child(ren) in older age groups. The remaining correlations are insignificant. In summary, except the strong correlations between Q5, Q6(l) and Q6(2), and the moderate correlations between Q3, Q6(l) and Q6(2), the background variables can be consid-ered mutually independent. Because of the strong correlations between Q5, Q6(1) and Q.6(2), only Q5 is used when we later examine the correlation between background variables and curricular needs variables. Training Experience We use the phrase "framing experience" to collectively refer to experience that students had in both enrolling and framing in the Stepping Up Program. Section II of the questionnaire surveys the respondents for selected aspects in such experiences and the results are again presented and discussed via frequency distribution tables. This section covers eight questions (14 through 21). Although question 22 was originally placed in the "curriculum needs percep-- 46 -tion" section (Section III in the questionnaire), it is more naturally grouped in the present section. i Enrolment Waiting time for enrolment is an indicator of whether the size of this program is satisfy-ing the needs of immigrant women for such training. Table 17 indicates that 86.1% of the women waited for 2 months or less for enrolment; 100% of the women were able to enter the program within 4 months or less. The size of the program is thus judged appropriate to address the training needs of immigrant women. Table 17 Sample Distribution by Waiting Time for Enrolment (N = 36) Waiting Time (Month) Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage 1 22 61.1 22 61.1 2 9 25 31 86.1 3 3 8.3 34 94.4 4 2 5.6 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Mean: 1.58 Standard Deviation: 0.87 Median: 1.00 The subjects were asked for their top three reasons for entering the Stepping Up Pro-gram. Table 18 shows the distribution of the sample by these reasons. Interestingly, 58.3% - 47 -of women listed "learning English" as their most important reason for entering the program. In addition, 19.4% and 13.9% of the subject indicated "learning job-seeking skills" and "learn-ing Canadian culture", respectively, as their most important reasons for entering the program. It should be noted that none of the subjects considered "learning life skills" as the top reason for enrolling in the program. For the second most important reason, 27.8% of the respondents stated "learning job-seeking skills"; another 27.8% indicated "learning computer basics". For the third most important reason, 25% listed "learning job-seeking skills"; 25% chose "learning Canadian culture"; and 19.4% selected "learning computer basics". Overall, the dominant reasons for entering the program appear to be (in decreasing order of importance) learning English, learning job-seeking skills, learning computer basics, and learning Canadian culture. Notice that "learning life skills" was not listed as an important reason for enrolment. This finding agrees with the analysis of the answers to questions 32, 33, 34, 27(1), 27(3), 27(4), and 27(10). Table 18 Sample Distribution by Reasons for Entering Stepping Up Program (N = 36) Reasons Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage First Reason To Learn English 21 58.3 21 58.3 To Learn Job-Seeking Skills 7 19.4 28 77.8 To Learn Canadian Culture 5 13.9 33 91.7 to Learn Computer Basics 2 5.6 35 97.2 To Satisfy Self-fulfilment Needs 1 . 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 - 48 -Cumulative Cumulative Reasons Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Second Reason None 1 2.8 1 2.8 To Learn English 5 • 13.9 6 16.7 To Learn Life Skills 5 13.9 11 30.6 To Learn Job Seeking Sills 10 27.8 21 58.3 To Learn Canadian Culture 4 11.1 25 69.4 To Learn Computer Basics 10 27.8 35 97.2 To Make friends 1 2.8 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Third Reason None 1 2.8 1 2.8 To Learn English 2 5.6 3 8.3 To Learn Life-Skills 2 5.6 5 13.9 To Learn Job-Seeking Skills 9 25.0 14 38.9 To Learn Canadian Culture 9 25.0 23 63.9 To Learn Computer Basics 7 19.4 30 83.3 To Receive a Certificate 1 2.8 31 86.1 To Make Friends 3 8.3 34 94.4 To Satisfy Self-Fulfilment Needs 2 5.6 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Since the emphasis of the Stepping Up Program was to teach life skills, job-seeking skills, and Canadian culture, the above results indicate a deviation of the learner-perceived curricular needs from those preconceived for the program: Two of the four most important learning needs perceived by the subjects, English and computer basics, were not in the core curriculum of the program. The original curriculum only partially reflected the learning needs of the students, i.e., learning job-seeking skills and learning Canadian culture. This is an - 49 -important observation, since it partially confirms the underlying hypothesis for this study — expert designed curricula do not adequately reflect the needs of immigrant women in training programs — and points to the importance of studying the learner-perceived curricular needs. The high curricular needs for English and computer basics can be related to the job quality down-grading discussed previously. Working knowledge of the computer and English communication ability are essential in today's Canadian society to perform professional, sub-professional and even clerical jobs. The immigrant women's desires to regain higher-quality employment are manifested as strong demands for English and computer learning in their curricular needs. Respondents were also asked who exerted the major influence on their decision to enter the program. Table 19 shows the sample breakdown with respect to this question. The largest percentage of subjects made the decision on their own; a noticeable percentage of subjects were influenced by friends. Social workers and instructors of other programs also played a role in influencing the students to enter the program. - 50 -Table 19 Major Influence on Decision to Enter Stepping Up Program (N = 36) Cumulative Cumulative Major Influence Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Self 18 50.0 18 50.0 Spouse 2 5.6 20 55.6 Friends 7 19.4 27 75.0 Social Worker 5 13.9 32 88.9 Other Program Instructors 4 11.1 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Problems and Preferences Not coincidentally, the biggest problem experienced by the women was insufficient English (Table 20). This agrees with the previous finding that a large proportion of the respon-dents entered the program to learn English. This reinforces the need to increase the weight of English instruction in the program. Other difficulties experienced by the respondents, in order of decreasing importance, are financial difficulty (19.4%) (indicating the necessity of subsidy of students during program attendance), child care (19.4%), and lack of home support (13.9%). As to preference for class schedule, the majority (75%) indicated that they liked full time instruction (Table 21). - 51 -Table 20 Problems Experienced While Attending Stepping Up Program (N = 36) Problem No. of Respondents Experiencing Problems % of Total Respondents Location of Campus 4 11.1 Insufficient English 18 50.0 Financial Difficulty 7 19.4 Lack of Home Support 5 13.9 Tired After Working 3 8.3 Child Care 7 19.4 Personal Health 3 8.3 Table 21 Sample Distribution by Preferred Class Schedule (N = 36) Preferred Class Schedule Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage No Response 1 2.8 1 2.8 Full-Time 26 72.2 27 75.0 Morning Class 9 25.0 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Training Effectiveness Because one of the most important objectives of the Stepping Up Program is to help the trainees find a job after completion of the program, the students' confidence towards finding a job is used as a rough indicator of the effectiveness of the program. Table 22 shows 44.4% of the respondents are either confident or very confident, while another 44.4% are neutral. Because of a lack of pre-training survey, it is chrricult to judge the implications of these - 52 -results. Nevertheless, from talking with the instructors and coordinators, it is believed that the results represent a fair improvement in the students' confidence towards finding a job, indicat-ing a moderate success of the training program. This conclusion is partly validated by Table 23, which shows that 72.2% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that "the program will greatly help you fit into life in Canada". Table 22 Sample Distribution by Confidence about Finding a Job (N = 36) Confidence Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Very Confident 4 11.1 4 11.1 Confident 12 33.3 16 44.4 Neutral 16 44.4 32 88.9 Unconfident 2 5.6 34 94.4 Very Unconfident 2 5.6 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Mean: 2.61 Standard Deviation: 0.96 Median: 3.00 Scale: 1 =Very Confident, 2=Confident, 3=Neutral, 4=Unconfident, 5=Very Unconfident Table 23 Sample Distribution by Opinion of Stepping Up Program (N = 36) Program W i l l Greatly Help You Fit into Life in Canada Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Strongly Agree 7 19.4 7 19.4 Agree 19 52.8 26 72.2 Neutral 9 25.0 35 97.2 Disagree 1 2.8 36 100.0 Strongly Disagree 0 0.0 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Mean: 2.11 Standard Deviation: 0.75 Median: 2.00 Scale: 1 = Strongly Agree, 2=Agree, 3=Neutral, 4=Disagree, 5 = Strongly Disagree - 53 -Student Satisfaction Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction towards the Stepping Up Program on a 5-point Lickert scale. Table 24 shows that 77.8% of the women felt they were either "satis-fied" or "very satisfied". None of the respondents was "dissatisfied" or "very dissatisfied" with the program. The median response is 2.00 (satisfied). This further reinforces the earlier conclusion that the program is well received. Table 24 Sample Distribution by Satisfaction Towards Stepping Up Program (N= 36) Satisfaction Frequency Percentage Cumulative Frequency Cumulative Percentage Very Satisfied • 10 27.8 10 27.8 Satisfied 18 50.0 28 77.8 Neutral 8 22.2 36 100.0 Dissatisfied 0 0.0 36 100.0 Very Dissatisfied 0 0.0 36 100.0 Total 36 100.0 Mean: 1.94 Standard Deviation: 0.72 Median: 2.00 Scale: l=Very Satisfied, 2 = Satisfied, 3=Neutral, 4=Dissatisfied, 5=Very Dissatisfied Curricular Needs Section III of the questionnaire, Curricular Needs Perception, covers 13 questions (22 through 34). Item 22 has been regrouped with Section II and discussed previously. Treatment of the information gathered in this section will be different from that of the last two sections. The responses to questions 32 to 34 will be discussed first in association with previous findings. - 54 -This is followed by a brief discussion of questions 23 through 31. Variables extracted from questions 23 through 31 will then be used in statistical analyses. Course Reception and Content Needs Question 32 asked the women whether they would recommend the Stepping Up Program to a friend in an attempt to measure their reception of the course from a different perspective. Tliirty-four of the 36 women responded "yes"; one woman answered "no"; and one women stated "it depends". This indicates that the students held a supportive attitude towards the program, even though many of the women were not entirely satisfied with the program content, as will be discussed below. The reason could be that the program was well managed or that special programs for women were rare. Question 33 probes the learning content needs of the subjects as women. The re-sponses to this question (and question 34) are presented in Appendix V . The non-response rate for question 33 is quite high at 30.6% (11 women), perhaps because the non-respondents to this question were satisfied with the existing content or because this question was perceived as optional. Generally speaking, the perception of learning content needs varied among the respondents. Some new learning content needs were also identified. When analyzing the major reasons for women entering the Stepping Up Program we discovered that the most important ones were learning English, learning job-seeking skills, learning computer basics and learning Canadian culture. This is also reflected in the answers - 55 -to question 33 (see Appendix V). Because question 33 is unstructured, however, the answers are not always worded exactly as listed above. For example, communication skills (4 women), how to live happily in Canada (1 woman), how to adjust to Canadian life (1 woman), how to deal with culture shock (1 woman) were all cited. Content needs that can be considered specific to women include the following: "wom-en's rights and laws protecting women", "birth control", "where and how women can find work", "managing family life", and "women's role in different countries". These are quite isolated cases and represent the opinions of a small percentage of the respondents. However, because the question is open-ended, the percentage of women wishing to learn about these things may have been underestimated. Whether this is the case could be found out in another survey. New learning content needs that surfaced in the responses to this question include the following: self-esteem adjustment, childcare skills, dealing with culture shock, information about other training programs, recreational activities, Canadian educational, legal, postal, and medical systems. The importance of these needs and the possibility of incorporating them into the program should be investigated. Suggested Changes to Program Question 34 polls the women for suggestions of changes to the program. The non-response rate is 16.7% (6 cases). The suggested changes pertain to learning content, program length, methods of teaching, teaching materials, admission requirements, and class schedules. - 56 -These suggested changes (listed in Appendix V) are consistent with the four important learning needs we identified previously, but some suggestions are conflicting. Suggested changes include increasing English teaching (8 women) and computer in-struction (8 women). Five women would like instruction on basic life skills (e.g., taking buses, shopping, banking) significantly reduced or eliminated. This finding, in agreement with pre-vious fmdings, is important since teaching lifeskills is one of the basic functions of this program. It may be that these women have already learned these skills since coming to Canada (on average, these women have been in Canada for 2.5 years). Six women found the program not challenging enough; one of them even requested more homework and assignments. Some women wanted to see the admission criteria more controlled. Four women recommended recruiting candidates with the same level of English proficiency. Two women suggested admitting only women with strong learning motivation. Four respondents wanted the program length increased. Two women would like workshops (i.e., guest speakers) reduced or eliminated while one woman would like more guest speakers invited. Two women stated that the teaching materials were not rich enough. Another two women would like the choice of alternative class schedules. One woman considered class discussion a waste of time and instead wanted more instruction. Interestingly enough, one woman advised the instructor to firm up the students' attendance. - 57 -In summary, the two most important findings from the responses to this question are those about reducing or eliminating basic life skills instruction, and segregating students accord-ing to their English levels. These possibilities should be investigated. Maybe after separating the students into different classes, the learning content could be tailored to each class, for example, by retaining basic life skills instruction for the class with a lower level of English while eliminating it for the class who speak better English. However, whether separating students according to their English proficiency will effect greater benefits in students' learning is un-known. We will explore segregating the students by statistical analysis later. Data Transformation The sample responses to questions 23 through 31 are discussed here. To facilitate quantitative analysis, the nine questions are transformed to 53 binary variables as follows. In the questionnaire, each of the seven questions (23 through 29) requested the respondent to check off as many choices as applicable among several choices given under that question. Each of the several choices under a specific question was converted to a binary variable, designated by symbol Qn(m), where n refers to the question number and m the choice number under that question. For example, Q27(9) represents the binary variable transformed from the ninth choice, "Canadian law", under question 27, "which of the following do you wish to learn". When a respondent checks off a choice, a value "1" is assigned to its associated binary variable for that respondent (called a "case"). Otherwise, a value of "0" is assigned to that variable. That is, if subject 10 checks off "Canadian law" under question 27, the variable Q27(9) gets a value of 1 for case 10. After assigning values to all 53 variables for all 36 cases, we obtain a - 58 -matrix of 36 rows (cases) by 53 columns (variables), having 1908 entries of l's or 0's. This is the matrix we used for subsequent statistical analyses. Since the matrix consists of only l's and 0's, the data are dichotomous or binary data, and the variables dichotomous or binary variables. It is important to remember that in the data matrix" 1" represents the presence of a curricular need while "0" the absence of that need. The choices in the seven questions (23 through 29) phrased as either "none of the above" or "others (specify)" were disregarded, because "none of above" is redundant (equivalent to all variables associated with the choices preceding "none of the above" taking a value of 0) while "others (specify)" could not be quantified. Little information is lost by this treatment. Although the choices in questions 30 and 31 are mutually exclusive, thus different from the choices in the other seven questions (which are non-mutually exclusive), they were converted the same way to ensure consistency. The resulting data matrix was inspected for variables that had no variation (i.e., l's or 0's for all 36 cases). Such variables were first removed because they made the data matrix singular and thus many matrix calculations impossible. Before disposing of each variable, the meaning of lack of variation is examined. Only one variable completely lacks variation: Q30(2). It has a value of 0 for all 36 cases. In other words, among the three choices (female, male, doesn't matter) of question 30 ("what type of instructor do you prefer?"), not a single women chose a male instructor. As a - 59 -matter of fact, the majority (29 women, 80.5% of total) selected "doesn't matter" while the remaining women (seven or 19.5% of total) chose "female". This is an interesting observation, but we will not pursue the reasons behind it. After removing Q30(2), a Pearson's correlation matrix was calculated (not shown) among the remaining 52 variables to identify highly correlated variables. Highly correlated variables tend to make the data matrix singular, causing difficulties in matrix operations and statistical analyses. A correlation of -1 was found between two pairs of variables, Q30(l)-Q30(3) and Q31 (1 )-Q31(2). This is because the two pairs are mutually exclusive variables. Two arbitrarily chosen variables, Q30(3) and Q31(2), were then deleted to avoid matrix singularity. The resulting data matrix contained 50 variables. Next, the data matrix was inspected for variables with minimum variation, arbitrarily defined as having three or less 0's or l's. Five variables were identified: Q23(2), Q23(7), Q27(l), Q27(3), andQ27(10). Q23(2) has three l's and thirty-three 0's, indicating that only three students (8.3% of total) ever had negative experiences with the instructors. This points to the good rapport between the instructors and learners. Q23(7) contains only one 1, meaning that only one student (2.8% of total) held the opinion that the workload was too high. This is consistent with the previous finding that many students regard the program "not challenging enough". Q27(l), Q27(3) and Q27(10), corresponding to needs for instructions on "shopping", "trans-- 60 -portation", and "birth control", have one, two and three l's, respectively. This means that the vast majority did not need instruction on these topics. Again, this is consistent with earlier findings that many students did not want instruction on life skills. After removing the five variables with minimum variation, the resulting 36 rows (cases) by 45 columns (variables) data matrix, given in Appendix VI, was used for cluster analysis. Cluster Analysis It is hypothesized that sub-groups exist in our sample such that significant differences exist in curricular needs across sub-groups while those needs are relatively uniform within each sub-group.. This hypothesis was explored using cluster analysis. In a cluster analysis, we look at the similarities among the cases, then associate the most similar cases into "clusters". The number of clusters is chosen according to two criteria: the clusters must have meaningful interpretation; the differences among different clusters must be statistically significant. Measures of Dissimilarities To arrive at the most meaningful cluster structure, several measures of similarities were used to cluster the cases: Euclidean distance, Pearson's correlation, percentage mismatches, and three other similarity coefficients as described below. The Euclidean distance is the geometric distance between two data points (i.e., cases) in the p-dimensional orthogonal space. In our case, each case is a data point in a 45-dimen-sional space whose orthogonal axes are represented by the 45 binary variables. For any two cases, i and k, i*k; we have the following data table: Binary Variable 1 2 3 45 Case i 1 0 1 0 Case k 0 0 1 1 Letxtj be the score (0 or 1) of case i on binary variable j andx^ be the score (again 0 or 1) of case k on binary variable ;'. The Euclidean distance between case i and case k, D s , is calculated as D Obviously, 0 if x.=x^0 or xfX].=l „ f  X.FX^ (X-X )2={ V ** v v' V 11 if x,*x^ so the squared Euclidean distance, D s 2 , provides a count of mismatches of the binary variable values between case i and case k. The larger the distance D^, the greater the number of mis-matches; thus the more "distant" case i from case k. After c a l c u l a t i n g f o r all i=l ,2, 36 and £=1,2, 36, we obtain a symmetric matrix whose diagonal entries (representing the distances of all cases to themselves) are 0's. This matrix was the "dissimilarity" matrix used in cluster analysis. 62 The other five similarity measures can best be expla ined b y construct ing a cont ingency table between case i a n d case k, as fol lows: Case k 1 0 Tota ls Case i 1 a b a + b 0 c d c + d Tota ls a + c b + d p=a + b + c + d There are a variables for w h i c h bo th case i and case k take the value o f 1; d variables for w h i c h bo th take 0; b variables for w h i c h case i takes 1 wh i l e case k takes 0; and c variables for w h i c h case i takes 0 whi l e case k takes 1. The sum of a, b, c, and d is the number of b inary variables, p(=45). The usual product moment correlation coefficient (i.e., Pearson's corre lat ion coefficient) can now be calculated. In the present case, this coeff icient is ca lculated among cases instead of among variables, the latter be ing the convent iona l app l i ca t ion . The corre lat ion coefficient takes a special f o rm w h e n b inary variables are concerned: ad- be ra = -J(a+b)(c+d)(a+c)(b+d) It can be seen f rom the above fo rmula that r s is greater i f the proport ions of matches (a and d) between case i and case k are greater. Ca l cu la t ing r& for a l l i= 1,2, 36 a n d k= 1,2, 3 6 , we ob ta in a symmetr ic mat r i x whose d iagonal entries (representing the corre lat ion - 63 -coefficients of all cases to themselves) are l's. This matrix is a similarity matrix. By negating all entries in the similarity matrix, we obtain the dissimilarity matrix, which is used in cluster analysis. It should be pointed out that this coefficient places equal importance on 1-1 matches and 0-0 matches, as can be deducted from the symmetry about a and d in the above formula. In contrast, two of the four variables discussed below, S2 and S3, totally disregard the 0-0 matches and calculate the similarity coefficients on the basis of 1 -1 matches only. Percentage difference between cases i and k, denoted by A%, is calculated as follows: It measures exactly what the name says: the percentage .of mismatches of variables between cases i and k. A symmetric dissimilarity matrix is obtained by calculating Aik for all pairs of cases. The remaining three similarity coefficients are calculated according to the formulae b+c a+b+c+d (SYSTAT, Inc., 1992b): a a a+b+c+d V a a+b+c - 64 -a+d a+b+c+d V Again, the three symmetric similarity matrices are computed from applying the above formulae to all pairs of cases. By negating all entries in the resultant similarity matrices, we obtain the three dissimilarity matrices to be used in cluster analysis. The six dissimilarity matrices were used for cluster analysis using the statistical software package SYSTAT©1 for Windows© 2, Version 5.04 (SYSTAT, Inc., 1992a, 1992b). Three hierarchical linkage methods, simple, complete, and average, were tried on all six matrices for a total of 18 runs. A l l 18 outputs were examined and the best results, which happened to be obtained by the complete linkage method using the Euclidean, percentage difference and S4 dissimilarity matrices, are shown in Figure 2. The three kinds of matrices yielded identical outputs. This is not surprising if we consider what they measure. The result presented in Figure 2 is that from the S4 dissimilarity matrix. S4 measures the fraction of matched variables (both 1-1 and 0-0 matches) relative to the total number of variables (45). The absolute values of the numbers on the right margin refer to the similarities at which the mergers on their left occur. Clustering Copyright by SYSTAT Inc., 1990-1994. 2 Copyright by Microsoft Corp., 1985-1992. - 65 -D I S S I M I L A R I T I E S -1.000 Subj. 11 No. 15 16 22 14 36 28 29 27 34 10 9 31 33 19 18 35 21 7 1 25 17 30 24 23 3 2 32 26 20 5 4 12 8 6 13 + + — 0.000 -0.733 -0.778 -0.489 -0.756 -0.689 -0.600 -0.844 -0.667 -0.422 -0.600 -0.756 -0.689 -0.778 -0.333 -0.667 -0.844 -0.800 -0.622 -0.778 -0.756 -0.667 -0.711 -0.511 -0.689 -0.600 -0.778 -0.400 -0.822 -0.644 -0.756 -0.511 -0.667 -0.533 -0.622 -0.711 Figure 2 Clustering of Subjects by Complete Linkage Using S4 Dissimilarity Matrix - 66 -Group Number Determination Determining the optimum number of groups is an exercise of compromise. We wish to divide the subjects into fewer groups, because the potential usage of the grouping scheme is to divide the candidates into different needs classes, each with more uniform curricular needs, and teaching many classes with different curricula would be difficult. On the other hand, more groups mean more uniform curricular needs in each group (easier to teach). Figure 2 identifies three reasonable grouping schemes having four, three, and two groups, respectively (Table 25). As we decrease the number of groups, at least one of the merging similarities decreases. This reflects the fact that the fewer groups we divide the sample into, the greater the number of subjects within each group, and thus the smaller the similarity among subjects within each group. Table 25 Three Grouping Schemes from Cluster Analysis Grouping Scheme No. of Groups Group Symbol Group Size Group Members (Subject No.) Merging Similarities (%) I 4 • A 9 11,15,16,22,14,36,28,29,27 48.9 B 5 34,10,9,31,33 60.0 C 13 19,18,35,21,7,1,25,17,30,24,23,3,2 51.1 D 9 32,26,20,5,4,12,8,6,13 51.1 II 3 A 14 11,15,16,22,14,36,28,29,27,34,10,9, 31,33 42.2 B 13 19,18,35,21,7,1,25,17,30,24,23,3,2 51.1 C 9 32,26,20,5,4,12,8,6,13 51.1 III 2 A 14 11,15,16,22,14,36,28,29,27,34,10,9, 31,33 42.2 B 22 19,18,35,21,7,1,25,17,30,24,23,3,2, 32.26.20.5.4.12.8.6.13 40.0 - 67 -Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) is used to choose the best grouping scheme among the three. Two of the assumptions for M A N O V A , multivariate normality of the population and random sampling, are both violated in our present case: binary variables are impossible to have multivariate normal distribution; and our sample is a convenient instead of a random sample. Despite this, it is felt that M A N O V A can still be used in our present case for two reasons: First, we are not testing hypotheses about the population but rather using M A N O V A to compare whether differences across the different groups are significant (we are treating our sample as a population in this test). Second, we have a reasonably large sample size (n=36) and M A N O V A is often a robust test, so we feel the deviation from multivariate normality should not make the M A N O V A test useless. When all 45 binary variables were used, the multivariate statistics could not be com-puted because of singular matrix problems. To overcome these problems, the variable number was reduced by using only the variable's associated with questions 25 through 29 (36 variables in total) in the M A N O V A . Questions 25 through 29 include the more important curricular needs variables — those mquiring about content needs and teaching method needs. The M A N -O V A conducted on the 36 variables so derived was again unsuccessful because of singular matrix problems. The singular matrix problem is most likely caused by variables lacking variations. Based on this postulation, the above 36 variables were again examined, this time removing the variables with least variations — in the present case, all variables reporting five or less l's or O's. - 68 -This resulted in removal of six variables: Q26(l), Q27(l), Q27(3), Q27(4), Q27(10), and Q27(12). Q26(l), "resume writing", and Q27(12), "computer basics", were removed because most respondents answered "yes" to these choices, thus resulting in these two variables having the value 1 in most cases. The other four variables, representing "shopping" (Q27( 1)), "trans-portation" (Q27(3)), "housing" (Q27(4)), and "birth control" (Q27( 10)), were removed because these variables had an overwhelming number of 0's. These are the variables representing life skills content, which, we found earlier, was thought unnecessary by most respondents. In all, these six variables do not present significant differentiating power among different groups; removing them is logical, and should not affect the validity of the M A N O V A conducted on the remaining 30 variables. Table 26 presents the results of M A N O V A performed on the three grouping schemes, again using SYSTAT© for Windows© software package. A l l three statistics calculated using grouping scheme III are insignificant at an a level of 0.05. So this grouping scheme was abandoned. Comparing the four statistics computed for grouping schemes I and II, the statisti-cal tests using Hotelling-Lawley Trace and Theta are insignificant for I at a =0.05, but all statistical tests are significant for II at the same a level. Consequently, grouping scheme II is judged the best and retained for subsequent analyses. Now that our sample is divided into three groups using cluster analysis, what do these groups mean? What is responsible for this grouping? The answers to these questions will be explored next through factor analysis and discriminant analysis. - 69 -Table 26 M A N O V A Statistics for Three Different Grouping Schemes Test Grouping Schemes I II III Willcs' A 0.000 0.001 0.089 F Statistic 3.577 3.648 1.078 d.f. 90, 9 60, 8 30, 5 Probability 0.016 0.028 0.289 Phllai Trace 2.841 1.894 0.911 F Statistic 2.985 2.970 1.078 d.f. 90, 15 60, 10 30, 5 Probability 0.010 0.033 0.289 Hotelling-Lawley Trace 220.68 83.49 10.25 F Statistic 4.087 4.174 1.708 d.f. 90, 5 60, 6 30, 5 Probability 0.059 0.038 0.289 Theta 0.995 0.987 n/a S 3 2 n/a M 13 13.5 n/a N 0.5 1.0 n/a Probability 0.207 0.047 n/a Factor Analysis Factor analysis seeks to identify a few common, unobservable underlying factors respon-sible for the observed correlation of a large number of variables. In our present case, we endeavoured to identify a few factors that can explain the observed correlation structure of the 45 binary variables representing various aspects of curricular needs. To use factor analysis sensibly, there must be relatively high correlations among a portion of the observable variables; that is to say, a fraction of the off-diagonal entries in the correlation matrix must be signifi-cantly different from zero. Doing factor analysis on mutually independent variables (signalled - 7 0 -by a correlation matrix whose off-diagonal entries are all practically zero) is meaningless. To check for this condition, the correlation matrix of our 45 variables was calculated (not shown); many large (in absolute value) off-diagonal entries were found. Thus we proceeded with factor analysis. Solution A l l 45 variables were used initially in the factor analysis. Both principal component (PC) and principal factor (PF, also called iterative principal component, or IPC) solutions were computed using 5-, 6-, 7- and 10-factor models, with and without varimax rotation, for a total of 16 trials. No reasonable solutions were identified from these trials. Next, the number of variables was reduced from 45 to 30 using the same technique described previously in the discussion of M A N O V A . The 30 variables are those associated with questions 25 through 29 with the following variables removed: Q26(l), Q27(l), Q27(3), Q27(4), Q27( 10), Q27( 12). Again, both principal component solution and principal factor solution were computed using 5-, 6-, 7- and 10-factor models, but this time with four methods of rotation: no rotation, varimax rotation, equimax rotation, and quartmax rotation; resulting in a total of 32 trials. The resulting factor solutions were then evaluated using two criteria: interpretability and total percentage of variance explained by the factor model. The best solution was found to be the six-factor model obtained by principal component solution with a varimax rotation. This model is presented in Table 27. - 71 -Table 27 Varimax-Rotated Principal Component Solution of Six-Factor Model Variables Factor Loadings Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6 Q27(16) 0.703 0.194 0.262 0.246 -0.085 -0.022 Q26(3) 0.692 -0.023 -0.160 -0.002 0.024 0.052 Q29(6) 0.681 0.084 0.151 0.166 0.021 0.114 Q26.(5) 0.600 0.248 0.159 -0.317 0.190 0.399 Q26(4) 0.556 -0.428 -0.091 -0.116 0.142 0.238 Q28(l) 0.551 -0.205 0.063 -0.044 -0.043 0.120 Q28(2) 0.532 0.352 0.221 0.154 -0.360 0.184 Q26(2) 0.464 0.199 0.068 0.017 0.326 -0.008 Q29(3) 0.156 0.799 0.020 -0.233 0.112 -0.039 Q27(7) 0.032 -0.641 0.401 -0.139 0.214 -0.247 Q28(4) 0.142 0.626 0.057 -0.305 0.137 -0.203 Q27(6) 0.327 -0.105 0.827 0.164 -0.150 -0.053 Q27(9) 0.163 0.087 0.780 0.314 0.146 0.047 Q25(4) -0.099 -0.032 0.748 0.012 0.233 0.221 Q27(5) -0.245 -0.276 0.504 -0.317 -0.176 0.166 Q27(2) 0.422 -0.226 0.428 -0.081 0.290 -0.204 Q29(l) 0.368 0.126 0.419 -0.243 0.021 0.159 Q25(2) 0.023 -0.020 0.018 0.669 -0.010 0.146 Q27(15) -0.043 0.038 0.022 0.584 0.022 -0.078 Q29(5) 0.214 -0.169 0.052 0.495 -0.071 0.399 Q27( l l ) 0.259 -0.296 0.228 0.404 -0.029 0.398 Q27(14) -0.115 0.645 -0.022 0.317 0.099 -0.090 Q25(l) -0.017 -0.027 -0.027 -0.224 0.733 -0.037 Q25(3) 0.144 -0.015 -0.134 0.128 0.697 -0.215 Q25(5) -0.141 0.083 0.318 -0.004 0.580 0.335 Q28(3) 0.032 0.133 0.350 0.103 0.562 - 0.248 Q29(2) 0.125 0.267 0.248 0.362 0.447 -0.016 Q29(4) 0.140 -0.133 -0.051 0.099 0.129 0.816 Q27(13) 0.094 -0.039 0.120 0.071 -0.115 0.647 Q27(8) 0.323 0.132 0.416 -0.212 0.045 0.507 Variance Explained by Factor 3.789 2.768 3.388 2.251 2.515 2.448 Vo Variance Explained by Factor 12.63 9.23 11.29 7.50 8.38 8.16 Cumulative % Explained 12.63 21.86 33.15 40.65 49.03 57.19 - 72 -Interpretation The following variables have high loadings on factor 1: Q27( 16), time management and goal setting; Q26(3), employment phone techniques; Q29(6), tours and field trips; Q26(5), hidden job market; Q26(4), interview skills; Q28(l), life skills instruction; Q28(2), employment instruction; and Q26(2), help wanted ads. This factor represents the learning content and instruction methods associated with the underlying needs of the students to learn skills necessary to gain employment. Accordingly, this factor is named "employment needs". Three variables load highly on factor 2: Q29(3), hands-on lessons; Q27(7), driving; and Q28(4), computer instruction. This factor reflects the students' needs to learn practical skills with a "hands-on" approach. This factor is therefore named "hands-on needs". Variables loading highly on factor 3 include the following: Q27(6), Canadian polite-ness; Q27(9), Canadian law; Q25(4), English listening; Q27(5), banking; Q27(2), geography; and Q29(l) , lecture (formal instruction). This factor underlies the women's needs to gain knowledge and skills (through formal instruction) to function properly in their new homeland. This factor is thus named "adjustment needs". Factor 4 is highly loaded by the following variables: Q25(2), English conversation; Q27( 15), hospital and medical systems; Q29 (5), workshop (guest speakers); Q27( l l ) , health and nutrition; and Q27( 14), school and educational systems. This factor reflects the women's - 73 -needs to learn about and interact with the Canadian society. So it is named "needs to under-stand Canadian society". Variables loading highly on factor 5 are Q25(l), English grammar; Q25(3), English writing; Q25(5), English reading; Q28(3), English instruction; and Q29(2), discussion (student participation). This factor pinpoints the women's needs to learn to communicate correctly in English through lectures and discussion. This factor is therefore named "formal English needs". The last factor is highly loaded by Q29(4), audio-visual aids; Q27( 13), stress manage-ment; and Q27(8), assertiveness. This factor reflects the women's needs to learn how to manage themselves internally. It is named "self-management needs". Note that the occurrence of audio-visual aids in this factor is difficult to explain. It may be coincidental. The six factors, identifying six underlying learning needs of the immigrant women, collectively explain 57.2% of the total variance observed for the 30 variables over 36 cases. To interpret the six factors derived, the factor profiles of all 36 subjects are plotted by group (as defined previously by cluster analysis) in Figure 3. The profiles on the right are those of the group averages. - 74 -C Average Figure 3 Six-Factor Profiles of 36 Respondents - 75 -Each profile is a representation of the magnitude of the six factor scores of a certain subject. It is constructed as follows: imagine six vertical axes placed in equal intervals along the bottom horizontal axis (the bottom line); from the left to the right, the first vertical axis represents the score of factor 1, the second axis the score of factor 2, and the sixth axis the score of factor 6. Then connect the points on the six axes representing the six factor scores; draw two separate vertical lines from the first and last factor score points to the horizontal line; finally remove the six vertical axises. A profile is drawn. Inspection of the factor profiles in Figure 3 reveals that, first, there is a general resem-blance among the profiles of members within each group and between the profiles of each group member and its group average; second, the variation of profiles is much greater across the different groups than within groups. This suggests that the six factors have some differentiating power to identify group belongings, further indicating that these factors have plausible meanings. The classifying ability of the six factors will be further pursued in the next section, discriminant analysis. The six factors can be used to help explain the differences between the three groups, A, B, and C, revealed in the previous cluster analysis. Group average factor scores are calculated for each of the six factors and compared in Table 28. Generally speaking, group A is widely separated from group C; they form sharp contrasts on five out of the six factors; the only exception is on the factor "needs to understand Canadian society" where both score similarly. Group B is generally between groups A and C (four of its six average factor scores are between - 7 6 -those of A and those of C). Group B's average factor scores are close to those of group A on "employment needs" and "self-management needs"; to those of group C on "hands-on needs"; and about midway between those of group A and those of group C on "adjustment needs" and "formal English needs". The only exception is on the factor "needs to understand Canadian society", where Group B scores the highest. Table 28 Factor Scores by Groups of Subjects Factors Group A B C Employment Needs Average Score -0.203 -0.246 0.671 Rank among Groups Medium Low High Hands-on Needs Average Score -0.020 0.476 0.656 Rank among Groups Low Medium High Adjustment Needs Average Score -0.498 0.132 0.583 Rank among Groups Low Medium High Needs to Understand Canadian Society Average Score -0.201 0.301 -0.122 Rank among Groups Low High Medium Formal English Needs Average Score -0.270 0.026 0.382 Rank among Groups Low Medium High Self-Management Needs Average Score -0.237 -0.217 0.681 Rank among Groups Low - Medium High Group A is characterized by lowest curricular needs among all three groups on five out of the six needs factors. On the first factor, "employment needs", although group A scores - 77 -between groups B and C, the score value is much closer to the low value attained by group B than to the high value achieved by group C. Group A is thus named "low needs group". In contrast, group C has the highest needs on all factors except one, "needs to understand Cana-dian society", on which it has a middle score. Group C is thus given the name of "high needs group". Group B is called a "selective needs group", because it has moderate to high scores on selected needs factors. The results from the cluster analysis and the factor analysis are coherent and enlighten-ing. The purpose of the cluster analysis was to "cluster" the subjects into groups based on their similarities in curricular needs; each group having a set of similar curricular needs differing from that of other groups. We found three such groups. The cluster analysis did not answer the question how the curricular needs of one group differed from those of other groups. This question was answered through the factor analysis. First, we found six underlying curricular needs factors. By observing the average factor scores of the three curricular needs groups, we revealed the differences among them in curricular needs. It turns out that the "commonness" among the subjects in group A is that they have low needs on all six needs factors examined in this study. Conversely, all subjects in group C are similar in that they have high needs on five of the six factors. Group B subjects are similar in that all have high needs in "understanding Canadian society" and "hands-on learning", moderate needs in "adjustment" and "formal English", and low needs in "employment" and "self-manage-ment". - 78 -These findings can be used in practice to guide curricular development, new student admission, and student placement. Clearly, students who benefit the most from the Stepping Up Program are those belonging to group C; they should be the primary target of the program. The curriculum for the group C students should emphasize the content comprising the five high needs factors identified in this study, while the content related to the "needs to understand Canadian society" should be modified. For group B students, a curriculum different from that of the group C should be developed, emphasizing on content relating to the "needs to under-stand Canadian society" and "hands-on learning". Content contributing to "adjustment needs" and "formal English needs" should also be taught moderately to group B; whereas content meeting "employment needs" and "self-management needs" should be slashed or greatly re-duced. Group A students benefit the least from the program, because they have the lowest needs of the content offered. To use the program resources most efficiently and to help stu-dents use their learning time most wisely, the program should decline group A students and refer them to more appropriate programs. To utilize the above strategies for curriculum development, student admission and placement successfully, we need to know, before class begins, what group each candidate belongs to. The discriminant analysis presented later provides a solution to this problem. - 79 -Correlation between Backgrounds and Curricular Needs To examine the correlation between the subjects' backgrounds and their curricular needs, the Spearman correlation coefficients between all non-nominal background variables (except Q6( 1) and Q6(2)) and the scores of the six needs factors as well as the needs group variable are calculated, as shown below. Background variables Q6(l) and Q6(2) are excluded because they are highly correlated with Q5, as discussed previously. The needs group variable is regarded as an ordinal variable, taking the values of 1, 2, and 3 for the "low needs", "selective needs" and "high needs" groups, respectively. Q 3 Q 5 07 Q 9 Q 1 3 (Age) (No . of (T ime i n ( F a m i l y (Educa t i on ch i ldren ) Canada ) income ) level) Needs Fac tor ( 1 ) E m p l o y m e n t 0 .073 -0 .039 -0.211 0 .190 0 .147 (2) H a n d s - o n -0 .074 -0 .080 -0 .284 -0 .036 -0 .044 (3) A d j u s t m e n t 0 .267 0.091 0.171 0 .251 -0 .155 (4) U n d e r s t a n d soc iety -0 .360 -0 .126 -0.071 -0 .150 0 .085 (5) F o r m a l Eng l i sh 0 .399 0 .412 0 .014 -0 .057 0 .298 (6) Se l f -management 0 .177 0 .103 0 .093 0 .034 0 .125 Needs group 0 .414 0.321 0 .192 0 .215 -0 .020 In the following discussion, correlation coefficients smaller than 0.2 (in absolute value) are considered insignificant. Generally, relatively weak correlations are observed. The older the subjects, the higher their formal English and adjustment needs, but the lower their needs to understand Canadian society. The more children the subject has, the stronger her desire to learn formal English. The longer a subject has stayed in Canada, the less employment skills and hands-on lessons she needs. The higher the subject's family income, the more adjustment - 80 -needs are required. Finally, the higher the subject's education, the stronger the wish to learn formal English. The age and the number of children of subjects have the greatest correlation with what curricular needs group they belong to (p=0A14 and 0.321, respectively): the older the subjects and the more children they have, the more likely they belong to a higher needs group. Also, the higher a subject's family income, the more likely she is in a higher needs group. Interest-ingly, the subjects' time in Canada and education levels are not correlated with their curricular needs groups. As the background variables are correlated with the subjects' curricular needs group status (albeit weak correlations), they are used, alone and in combination with the needs factor variables, in the discriminant analysis described next. Discriminant Analysis To explore the discriminating power of the six factors and the background variables, three linear discriminant analyses are performed. The basic purpose of discriminant analyses is to find the linear combinations of the independent variables (in this case the curricular needs factors and the background variables) capable of predicting the group belonging of a new case with the highest possible accuracy. Specifically, given the factor scores and/or the background variable values of a new case, the calculated scores of these linear combinations classify that case into the most appropriate group. For all three discriminant analyses, the groups A, B and - 81 -C, previously defined via cluster analysis, are used. In discriminant analysis, known values of independent variables in each established group are used to "train" a linear discriminant func-tion. The discriminant function derived is then used to assign new cases to one of the estab-lished classes (groups) in the future, provided the new cases have similar characteristics to the "training sample". The three linear cUscriminant analyses are conducted using (1) the six curricular needs factors, (2) all the non-nominal background variables, and (3) a combination of two back-ground variables and the six curricular needs factors. In using (1), we reason that, if the six curricular needs factors do represent underlying curricular needs of the subjects, they should have sufficient differentiating power to place the subjects (i.e., the cases) into their respective groups derived from cluster analysis according to curricular needs. In using (2), we try to predict what curricular needs group each subject belongs to from background variables alone. If this is successful, it could have practical utility: we can, theoretically, ask a new student to fill out a background information form when she applies for the program; then, by applying the discriminant functions on the "scores" of her background variables, we can decide whether to accept her and, if we do accept her, to appropriately assign her to one of the two classes having different curricula. This, however, constituents a "generalization" implying that certain as-sumptions have been met: the "training" sample used to derive the discriminant function is representative of its parent population and there is a correlation between the background characteristics of the students and their curricular needs (we have seen in the last section that this correlation is weak). In using (3), we attempt to combine background information with - 82 -curricular needs factors to achieve the best predictions. The results of the three discriminant analyses are presented in Table 29 and Figure 4. Table 29 Results of Three Discriminant Analyses Discriminant Analysis Using Six Curricular Needs Factors Linear discriminant functions: Group A discriminant score = -1.536 - 0.577*Factor( l ) + 0.303*Factor(2) - 0.887*Factor(3) -0.180*Factor(4) - 0.513*Factor(5) - 0.622*Factor(6) Group B discriminant score = -1.474 - 0.570*Factor( l ) + 0.824*Factor(2) - 0.103*Factor(3) + 0.394*Factor(4) - 0.136*Factor(5) - 0.541*Factor(6) Group C discriminant score = -3.470 +1.721 *Factor( l ) - 1.61 l*Factor(2) + 1.529*Factor(3) -0.289*Factor(4) +0.994*Factor(5) + 1.750*Factor(6) Assignment Rule: Assign a new case to the group for which its group discriminant score calculated from the six factor scores is the largest. Factor( 1) represents the score of factor 1. Performance of the Linear Discriminant Functions on the Sample Predicted Group Membership Tota l % of Cor-rect Predic-t ion A B c Actual Group A 10 4 0 14 71.4 B 4 7 2 13 53.8 Membership C 0 0 9 9 100.0 Tota l 14 11 11 36 Overall % membership correctly predicted: (26/36)* 100% = 72.2% - 83 -Discriminant Analysis Using Non-Nominal Background Variables Linear discriminant functions: Group A discriminant score = -10.911 + 0.890*Q3 + 2.399*Q5 - 1.204*Q6(1) - 1.204*Q6(2) + 0.076*Q7 +1.490*Q9 + 2.631*Q13 Group B discriminant score = -13.562 + 1.200*Q3 + 3.718*Q5 + 0.318*Q6(1) - 0.474*Q6(2) + 0.079*Q7 +1.835*Q9 + 2.494*Q13 Group C discriminant score = -20.911 + 1.689*Q3 + 2.891*Q5 - 3.511*Q6(1) + 3.364*Q6(2) + 0.122*Q7 +2.238*Q9 + 3.022*Q13 Assignment Rule: Same as above. Performance of the Linear Discriminant Functions on the Sample Predicted Group Membership Tota l % of Cor-rect Predic-t ion A B C Actual Group Membership A 9 2 1 12 75 B 4 7 2 13 53.8 C 1 2 6 9 66.7 Tota l 14 11 9 34 Overall % membership correctly predicted: (22/34)* 100% = 64.7% Note: Two cases are missing from the analysis because of missing values of Q9 in the raw data. Discriminant Analysis Using 6 Curricular Needs Factors and 2 Background Variables Linear discriminant functions: Group A discriminant score = -4.863 - 0.644*Factor( 1) + 0.31 l*Factor(2) - 1.406*Factor(3) + 1.066*Factor(4) - 1.488*Factor(5) - 0.482*Factor(6) + 1.904*Q3 + 0.495*Q5 Group B discriminant score = -7.905 - 0.602*Factor( l ) + 0.773*Factor(2) - 0.675*Factor(3) + 2.266*Factor(4) - 1.545*Factor(5) - 0.238*Factor(6) +2.473*Q3 + 1.467*Q5 Group C discriminant score = -12.588 + 1.696*Factor(l) - 1.735*Factor(2) + 0.822*Factor(3) + 1.958*Factor(4) - 0.685*Factor(5) + 2.131*Factor(6) + 2.892*Q3 + 1.901*Q5 Assignment Rule: Same as above. Performance of the Linear Discriminant Functions on the Sample Predicted Group Membership Tota l % of Cor-rect Predic-t ion A B C Actual Group Membership A 12 2 0 14 85.7 B 1 11 1 13 84.6 C 0 0 9 9 100 Tota l 13 13 10 36 Overall % membership correctly predicted: (32/36)* 100% = 88.9% - 84 -\ 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 A (a) Using six curricular needs 0 A a c A S factors only B , B A - A " . C . a A s o o (b) Using non-nominal back-ground variables A A A C (c) Using 2 background vari-ables and 6 curricular A _ 1 1 1 1 1 1 needs factors - 3 - 2 - 1 0 1 2 3 4 Discriminant 1 (a) M 2 e es B 1 1 •c w <n S 0 - 2 B B _ B 8 <B B C A C A a - 1 0 1 2 Discriminant 1 (b) • 3 2 n 1 a es a o hi 09 - 2 - 3 - 4 I I I B A 1 B 1 1 B 1 A 8 c c A S A 0 -A A A A A 8 A c 0 0 c . A A c -1 1 1 A 1 1 1 1 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 0 1 2 3 4 Discriminant 1 (c) Figure 4 Plots of Cases (Subjects) in Discriminant Spaces -85-It can be seen that, when the six curricular needs factors alone are used for the discrimi-nant analysis, 72.2% of the actual group membership is correctly predicted. Figure 4(a) shows that a very good separation of group C from groups A and B is achieved in the discriminant space; the prediction of membership for group C is perfect with 100% of the actual member-ship correctly predicted. Some confusion exists between group A and group B, which is also indicated by the correct prediction rates of 71.4% and 53.8%, respectively. Generally speak-ing, using the six factors as predictors of group membership is satisfactory. Considering that the six factors were derived independently of the three groups, the successful differentiation ability among the three curricular needs groups exhibited by the six factors is a further indica-tion that they are reasonable abstractions of underlying curricular needs. The discrimination among different curricular needs groups based on the non-nominal background variables is less successful (Table 29 and Figure 4(b)). In the discriminant analysis, only non-nominal background variables (including ordinal, interval and ratio variables) were used. Nominal (categorical) variables, such as continent of origin and mother tongue, lack magnitude; they can not be successfully integrated into discriminant analysis. This may have resulted in partial loss of discriminating information and, consequently, may contribute par-tially to the relatively poor rate of correct prediction. The more important reason is a lack of strong correlation between background variables and curricular needs, as we observed earlier. The overall correct prediction rate based on the background variables alone is 64.7%. This may seem low before we examine the following probabilities: (1) probability of correctly assigning 35.3% (12 out of 34) or more subjects into the three groups by total randomness ~ - 86 -38/100; (2) probability of correctly assigning 50% (17 out of 34) or more subjects into the three groups by total randomness ~ 15/1000; and (3) probability of correctly assigning 64.7% (22 out of 34) or more subjects into the three groups by total randomness ~ 2/100000. There-fore, 64.7% is a significant improvement over total randomness. In other words, the correla-tion between background variables and curricular needs in our sample, although relatively weak, is significant. The correlation is not strong enough, though, to provide a foundation for assigning candidates into different curricular needs groups according to background characteris-tics. The percentage of correct prediction of group memberships using two background variables, Q3 (age groups) and Q5 (number of children), in combination with the six curricular needs factors is very good at 88.9%: only 4 subjects out of 36 are misclassified. The subjects from different curricular needs groups are well separated in the discriminant space (Figure 4(c)). This dramatic improvement over the correct prediction rates achieved either by the six factors alone or by the background variables alone indicates that the information contained in the two sets of variables is complementary, not redundant. Most of the differentiating power in the background variable set is carried by only two variables, Q3 (age) and Q5 (number of children), as they have the highest (among all non-nominal background variables) correlations with the curricular needs group status (see the last section for discussion). Addition of more background variables will offer litde, if any, improvement in correct prediction rate. - 87 -Research Reliability and Validity To verify the research reliability and validity, personal interviews of selected subjects from the questionnaire respondents were conducted after completion of the survey. The reliability of the research was examined by comparing the answers of these subjects in the questionnaire survey with those during the interviews. The internal validity was assessed by looking at the accuracy of the statistical data interpretation in describing the reality revealed by the in-depth interviews. For example, we would clarify a respondent's primary needs in the interview, then find out whether the respondent scored highly in those needs in the six-factor model and whether she was classified into the appropriate group in the cluster analysis. Four women were interviewed in March, 1994. To maintain anonymity, pseudonyms are used in the following accounts. Interviews Gloria (Case 6) Gloria, 32 years old, was born in Hong Kong. She immigrated to Canada in May 1992 with her husband and was sponsored by her father in law. She was a high school graduate and used to be an office clerk in Hong Kong. Although she found a large Chinese community in Vancouver, she felt like a "big stranger" in this society. Encouraged by her family, Gloria enrolled in the Stepping Up Program in July 1992, her third month in Canada. She hoped that the program would help her better adjust to the new environment, gain employment knowledge and update her clerical skills. She spoke intermediate English and had a long-term goal of having "a satisfying office job". During the program, she engaged herself in various volunteer - 88 -office work, typing, photocopying, interpreting Cantonese and English. She considered this volunteer work as an opportunity for local employment experience, to get to know different people, and to learn about the society. She suggested that there be "follow-up classes" after the program, i.e., a job-oriented class that taught clerical skills or other specific skills. Gloria described herself as "enthusiastic" and "eager to learn". Gloria scored highly on adjustment needs, needs to understand Canadian society, and employment needs, ranking second, sixth and eleventh places respectively among 36 respon-dents. These scores matched what was found in the interview. She had a lower-than-average score in formal English needs (ranking 26th) which corresponded to her relatively good mastery of English. We earlier found that formal English needs are positively correlated with age and number of children. These correlations held true for Gloria since her lower-than-average score on formal English needs agreed with the fact that she is young (32) and has no children. Gloria had very low scores in self-management needs and hands-on needs (both ranking 33rd). The former can be explained by the fact that she already possessed good self-managing skills such as goal-setting and action-taking, as demonstrated by her volunteer work. The latter may be explained by the fact that she preferred formal instruction to less-structured hands-on lessons, as expressed by her in both the interview and the questionnaire. Her Group C (high needs group) status was supported by information from the interview such as her primary needs, curricular preferences, suggestions to the program, and volunteer work. - 89 -Gloria was well described by the six-factor model and the cluster analysis, confirming the validity of the research results. Her answers in the questionnaire and the interview were consistent, attesting to reliability of the research. Amelia (Case 14) Amelia, 38, was born in Iran. She landed first in Montreal in December 1991 as a Canadian government sponsored refugee. She later got divorced and moved to Vancouver with her seven year old daughter. Amelia had a university degree from Iran, majoring in veterinary science, and had worked as a veterinarian and an inspector for meat quality control for ten years. Without a license she failed to obtain a position in her profession in Canada. To gain experience, she volunteered in a pet clinic for three months. Amelia entered the Stepping Up Program in November 1992 with an intention to learn English and employment seeking skills, but she felt disappointed because the program content did not match her goals. The program was "not very challenging" as much time was spent on "very easy things" such as "bus fare", "transportation means", "writing a cheque". Because she had journeyed across Canada and travelled everyday from North Vancouver to Vancouver to attend the program, she did not need this kind of information. She suggested that the program increase computer instruction, and "a great deal of English" which was "very important to every one of us". Her long range goal was to obtain a university degree in Canada, but first she had to pass a grade 12 English examination or the TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) to meet admission require-ments. She transferred to another program without completing the Stepping Up Program. - 90 -Amelia ranked fifth on the factor of formal English needs. This agreed with her strong desire to learn English and to pass English tests for university admission, as expressed in the interview. She had average scores on the factors of employment needs, hands-on needs, and needs to understand Canadian society, ranking 18th, 20th, and 19th, respectively. These scores corresponded to her desire for further education and future professional employment which was made clear during the interview. She ranked 36th (last) and 32nd (fifth from the last) on adjustment and self-management needs, respectively, consistent with her expectations of the Stepping Up Program, remarks on life skills instruction, and perceived capability to handle her life as a single immigrant woman. Amelia was classified by the cluster analysis into Group A characterized by low motiva-tion. The low motivation was further reflected by her dropping out of the course. Amelia's case shows good agreement between the interview and the statistical analysis, lending further support to the validity of this research. In addition, she also provided the same answers to the same questions whether in the questionnaire or in the interview, indicating a high degree of reliability. Mary (Case 36) Mary, 34, came to Canada from Poland as a refugee. Her husband died of illness during the processing of their refugee claims. She landed in Vancouver with her six-year old son in May 1992. Although she had graduated from a university in Poland specializing in foreign language, and had taught German in a Polish university and been a translator for many years, - 91 -she felt it would be impossible to find employment in Canadian universities, and therefore decided to become an office clerk. She volunteered for several weeks in a medical clinic in Vancouver, but found herself inefficient in typing, using computers, and handling phone calls. Her social worker referred her to the Stepping Up Program and she enrolled in July 1992. Although she spoke excellent English, Mary thought her priorities were practicing English and learning office skills. She appreciated the employment skills and computer basics, whereas the life skills instruction was "too basic"; although in Canada only three months at the time of her enrolment, she had no problem finding bus information and shopping ("If I didn't know how to take a bus, how could I be in the class?"). Having been a language instructor herself, Mary considered language ability decisive in finding a job; she therefore wished that the program had taught more comprehensive English skills. She also emphasized the importance of learning computer basics and bought a second-hand computer during the program with savings from her limited refugee allowance. She wanted to learn WordPerfect and Lotus 123, and was taking a secretary training course. Mary had two high factor scores: formal English needs and needs to understand Cana-dian society, ranking ninth and tenth, respectively. This was in accordance with the informa-tion revealed from the interview. Her need to know Canadian society was understandable considering her educational and professional background. She had average scores in all the other factors, ranking 15th in hands-on needs, 16th in self-management, 21st in adjustment needs, and 22nd in employment needs. Her placement in the low needs group was in agree-ment with priorities stated in the interview to strengthen English and learn practical employ-- 92 -ment skills, which were not primary objectives of the Stepping Up Program. As in the previous two cases, an agreement between the facts revealed in the interview and the six-factor model and the cluster analysis was observed. Consistency in answers to questions during the interview and on the questionnaire was also noted. Natasha (Case 8) Natasha, 48, came to Canada from Russia in 1990 as a refugee, and lives with her two sons in Vancouver. Her husband remained in Russia, waiting for approval of his immigration application to Canada under the family reunion class. Natasha earned a diploma in applied science from a Russian college where she majored in engineering physics, and then worked as a production dispatcher and inspector in a factory. She has worked in Vancouver as a kitchen helper, a babysitter, a housekeeper, and a salesperson. Natasha considered lack of English proficiency a major barrier, even though she had completed an ESL course and a community English class prior to coming to the Stepping Up Program in April 1992 to learn English and employment skills. She was satisfied with every aspect of the program, including life skills instruction, liked the slow-paced learning because, as she jokingly said, of her "age", and pre-ferred morning classes as she worked part-time in the evening. Natasha did not have a clear employment goal beyond her wish to be reunited with her husband and to find a stable job with a satisfying income. - 93 -Natasha had high scores in most needs factors, ranking first in adjustment needs, eighth in both employment and formal English needs, and 14th in both needs to understand Cana-dian society and self-management. Her case illustrates the correlation we found earlier that the older subjects with children had higher adjustment and formal English needs; being one of the oldest women and having two children, she had the highest score in adjustment needs and a relatively high score in formal English needs. In addition, she stated that her being "older" created difficulties in her adjustment, and that language was the main barrier to getting a satisfying job. Separation from her husband resulted in stress and loneliness, which accounted for the high self-management needs, and being a mother motivated her to better understand the educational and medical systems. The low score for hands-on needs (ranked 29th) cannot be readily explained from information gathered in the interview. Natasha was in Group C, the high needs group; her desire to improve English, learn job seeking skills, and share experiences with others indicated she was an enthusiastic participant of the program. Discussion Consistency between the findings of the survey and the interviews suggests reliability of this research. Interpretations based on the six-factor model and the cluster analysis generally agreed with the reality uncovered during the interviews: life skills instruction was regarded unnecessary by most of the interviewees; English was stressed as a primary need; and three of the four women interviewed emphasized computer basics as an important learning need. These findings lend validity to the research. - 94 -Generalization of Results Based on the 36-subject sample, we identified three statistically different groups having six different curricular needs. The six factors were used in a discriminant analysis to assign subjects into different curricular needs groups. Although there was a weak correlation between background characteristics and curricular needs, the addition of two background variables to the six curricular needs markedly improved the correct group membership prediction in a discriminant analysis. The prediction of curricular needs group membership by background variables alone is not satisfactory. No generalizations are drawn from the sample results to the immigrant women popula-tion because of two important limitations. First, the sample is not a random but a convenience (availability) sample; second, the population is not well defined. However, the author believes, from speaking with experts in immigrant women training and counselling, that the research sample is to some degree representative of a larger population of non-English speaking immi-grant women coming to British Columbia. The findings may therefore provide some insight for educators and curriculum workers to aid curricular improvement, admission criteria devel-opment, and new student placement in training programs. - 95 -CHAPTER V - CONCLUSIONS A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S This study examined the curricular needs of immigrant women who completed an orientational training program, the Stepping Up Program in Vancouver. Data analysis identi-fied six basic learning needs, and indicated that the subjects could be divided into three needs groups. Although the program was well received, it did not satisfy the curriculum needs of all learners. This chapter presents conclusions to the research questions asked in Chapter I, and provides recommendations for further research and for the Stepping Up Program. Conclusions 1. What are the immigrant women's major learning needs in the training program? Six underlying curricular needs were identified by factor analysis: employment needs, hands-on needs, adjustment needs, needs to understand Canadian society, formal English needs, and self-management needs. These six factors were used in a discrimin-ant analysis to predict the needs group membership of a subject with a 72% success rate. - 96 -The curriculum used in the Stepping Up Program was suitable for some, but not all of the immigrant women who were enrolled. Specifically, life skills instruction was consid-ered unnecessary by many subjects. In contrast, English learning and computer basics, although not emphasized in the original curriculum, were wanted by a majority of the respondents. A down-grading of job quality, from professional jobs to service-oriented jobs and from skill-intensive jobs to labour-intensive jobs, was found to have occurred after immigra-tion. This partially explains the demand for computer basics and English language, since knowledge of the computer and an ability to communicate in English are essential for these women to regain higher-quality, more skill-intensive jobs in Canadian society. What are the significant differences in learning needs among them? Three curricular needs groups were identified by a cluster analysis. Applying a six-factor model, these three groups were labelled as "high needs", "selective needs", and "low needs". The high-needs group wanted content related to "employment", "hands-on experiences", "cultural adjustment", "formal English", and "self-management". The low-needs group lacked interest in this content, whereas the selective-needs group expressed a strong need for "understanding Canadian society" and for "hands-on learning", a moderate need for "cultural adjustment" and "formal English", and a low need for information related to "employment" and "self-management". The finding of three - 97 -needs groups provides a basis for curricular improvement, admission criteria develop-ment, and new student placement in training programs. 3. How are their backgrounds correlated with their learning needs? There was a weak correlation between the background characteristics of the women and their curricular needs. Age, number of children, time in Canada, family income, and j education level weakly correlated with one or more of the six needs factors. Age and number of children correlated with curricular needs group status, whereas the subjects' time in Canada and education levels did not. When two background variables, age and number of children, were used in conjunction with the curricular needs factors in a cUscriminant analysis, the prediction of a subject's group membership was high (89%), indicating that the differentiating power of the needs factors and of the background variables were mutually complementary, not redundant. When the background vari-ables alone were used in a discriminant analysis, the success rate of needs group mem-bership prediction was 64.7%. 4. How do they view their learning experience? The subjects had a supportive attitude towards the program: 94% of the respondents would recommend the program to others. The program organization, delivery and management were rated highly, the waiting time for enrolment was short, and student satisfaction was high. The effectiveness of training, as demonstrated by the confidence of the students in finding a job, was modest. - 98 -Recommendations for Further Studies 1. The findings from this study should be validated by a larger, random sample. 2. More background variables which are potentially correlated to curricular needs could be included in further research to increase the accuracy of group membership predic-tion. Specifically, English proficiency level should be included as a background vari-able, since it correlated with curricular needs. 3. The observed correlations between background variables and curricular needs factors, and between background variables and curricular needs grouping, could be further explored. Recommendations for Stepping U p Program 1. The curriculum should be modified to reflect the needs of students to learn more Eng-lish and computer basics, whereas content related to life skills, especially transporta-tion, housing and banking, should be reduced or eliminated. 2. Perceived learning needs should be determined clearly before applicants are admitted to the program. Where there is not a good match between perceived needs and pro-gram content, applicants should be referred to more appropriate programs. - 99 -) 3. The curriculum could be tailored to serve the perceived needs of different groups. For example, one class could focus on five or six needs factors, whereas another class could stress content related to "understanding Canadian society", "hands-on learning", and "adjustment needs" and far less on "employment needs" and "self-management needs". All classes could be provided with extensive English instruction and computer basics. 4. When life skills instruction is wanted by some students, its content could be deter-mined with considerable learner input; this would increase the efficiency of instruction and learning. - 100 -BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, J .T.M. (1918). The Education of the New-Canadian. Toronto: J .M. Dent &. Sons, Ltd. Anderson, T.W. (1984). An Introduction to Multivariate Statistical Analysis (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley &. Sons, Inc. Arnopoulos, S. (1978). Problems of Immigrant Women in the Canadian Labour Force. In By And About Immigrant Women. Toronto: Cross-Cultural Communication Centre. Benjamin, H . (1939). The Saber-Tooth Curriculum. New York: McGraw-Hill. Berwick, R. (1979). Assessing Needs in Ethnic Communities and Planning for Specific Purpose Instruc-tion. Graduating Essay. Vancouver: Department of English Education, the University of British Columbia. Bhagavatula, L. (1989). A Study of Immigrant Women in Vancouver. Vancouver: Vancouver Society on Immigrant Women. Bodnar, A. & Reimer, M . (1978). The Organization of Social Services and Its Implications for the Mental Health of Immigrant Women. In By And About Immigrant Women. Toronto: Cross-Cultural Communication Centre. Brawley, B.A. (1988). Questionnaire Development and Validation for Re-entry Women in a Federal Government Training Program. Master's Thesis. Vancouver: Department of Educational Psy-chology and Special Education, the University of British Columbia. Canada's Immigrants. (1984). Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services, Catalogue No. 99-936. Citizenship and Immigration Canada. (1994). 1992 Immigration Statistics. Ottawa: Public Works and Government Services of Canada. Dewey, J. (1897). My Pedagogic Creed. Michigan: E.L. Kellogg. - 101 -Dewey, J. (1963). Democracy and Education. New York: The MacMillan Publishing Co. Diamond, S. (1959). Information and Error: An Introduction to Statistical Analysis. New York: Basic Books, Inc. Edward, R. (1991). The Politics of Meeting Learner Needs: Power, Subject, Subjection. Studies in the Education of Adults, 23:1. Employment and Immigration Canada. (1991). Canada — A Source Book for Orientation, Lan-guage and Settlement Workers. Ottawa: Arcturus Productions Ltd. England, R. (1929). The Central European Immigrant in Canada. Toronto: The MacMillan Publishing Co. Estable, A. (1986). Immigrant Women in Canada — Current Issues. Ottawa: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women. Ghosh, R. (1978). Workshop on Being Non-White Female. In By And About Immigrant Women. Toronto: Cross-Cultural Communication Centre. Gress, J.R. ScPurpel, D.E. (1978). Curriculum: An Introduction to the Field. Berkeley, California: McCutchan Publishing Corp. Hooper, R. (Ed.). (1971). The Curriculum: Context, Design and Development. Edinburgh, Britain: Oliver &. Boyd. Immigration Canada. (1990). Managing Immigration: A Framework for the 1990s. Hull, Que-bec: Immigration Canada. Ironside, L. (1985). Chinese and Indo-Canadian Elites in Greater Vancouver: Their Views on Education. Master's Thesis. Burnaby, B.C.: Faculty of Education, Simon Fraser University. Johnson, R A . &Wichern, D.W. (1992). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Jupp, T.C. &Hodl in , S. (1975). Industrial English: An Example of Theory and Practice in Func-tional Language Teaching. London: Heinemann Educational Books. Kelly, A . V . (1989). The Curriculum: Theory and Practice (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Kerlinger, F.N. (1985). Foundations of Behavioral Research (3rd ed.). Montreal: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. - 102 -Knowles, M . (1970). The Modern Practice of Adult Education. New York: Association Press. Mastai, J. (1980). Adaptation Tasks of Israeli Immigrants to Vancouver. Doctoral Thesis. Vancouver: Department of Adult Education, the University of British Columbia. McMil lan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in Education — A Conceptual Introduction (2nded.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman Co. Multiculturalism Canada. (1981a). Immigrant Women in Canada: A Right to Recognition, Part 1, Report of the Proceedings of the Conference. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada. Multiculturalism Canada. (1981b). Immigrant Women in Canada: A Right to Recognition, Part 2, Recommendations from the Conference. Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada. Netting, N . (1985). Immigrant Women: Outsiders Inside Canada. Kelowna, B.C.: Multicultural Society of Kelowna. Ornstein, A.C. &Hunkins, F. (1988). Curriculum: Foundations, Principles and Issues. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, Inc. Petersen, T. (1986). Motivational Orientations of Adult Immigrants. Master's Thesis. Vancouver: Department of Administrative, Adult and Higher Education, the University of British Colum-bia. Seward, S.B. &McDade, K. (1988). Immigrant Women in Canada: A Policy Perspective. Ottawa: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women. Seydegart, K. & Spears, G. (1990). Beyond Dialogue — Immigrant Women in Canada, 1985-1990. Erin, Ontario: Erin Research Inc. Sharpes, D.K. (1988). Curriculum Traditions and Practices. London: Routledge. Silberman, C. (1971). Crisis in the Classroom. New York: Random House. SYSTAT, Inc. (1992a). SYSTAT for Windows: Graphics, Version 5 Edition. Evanston, IL: SYSTAT, Inc. SYSTAT, Inc. (1992b). SYSTAT for Windows: Statistics, Version 5 Edition. Evanston, IL: SYSTAT, Inc. Trimble, E.R. (1980). Women Returning to School: A Study of Their Background, Motivations, and Experiences. Master's Thesis. Vancouver: School of Social Work, the University of British Columbia. - 103 -s Tyler, R. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Walker, D.F.&Soltis, J.F. (1986). Curriculum and Aims. New York: Teacher's College Press. Wardhaugh, R. (1982). Education of the New Canadian: 1918 and 1981 — The Persistence of Certain Themes. TESL Talk, 13:3. Zais, R.S. (1976). Curriculum, Principles and Foundations. New York: Thomas Y. Crowew Co. - 104 -A P P E N D I X I C O N S E N T OF I M M I G R A N T SERVICES SOCIETY OF B.C. O N C O N D U C T I O N OF T H E S U R V E Y R E S E A R C H - 105 -A P P E N D I X II C O V E R I N G L E T T E R T O P A N E L EXPERTS A N D EXPERTS' RE-V I E W I N G F O R M - 107 -EXPERTS* REVIEWING FORM Introduction This Experts' Reviewing Form has duplicated all the questions in a survey questionnaire to be used to collect data from immigrant women subjects. The purpose of the research is to investigate curricular needs of immigrant women and to reveal factor relationships between their socio-demographical backgrounds and learning needs. Your professional judgment will help greatly in shaping the final questionnaire. Specific instructions are given below. 1. Please rate each question in terms of how appropriately the question is formulated and how relevant you feel the elicited information is in mlfiTling the objectives of the present research. Indicate your rating by circling the appropriate number on the scale to the right of each question. Number 1 means least appro-priate and relevant while number 4 means most appropriate and relevant. 2. Please write your comments and recommended changes to wording in the space provided. Please also indicate places you feel are confusing, unclear, offensive or otherwise inappropriate, 3. If you feel a question should be eliminated, please cross it out and mark "eliminate". In your professional judgement, if you feel specific questions will reinforce this study, please write them down in the space provided on the final page. Please use additional sheets of paper if required. 1 = not relevant 3 = relevant 2 = slightly relevant 4 = very relevant SECTION I - Background Information Please check (/ ) one answer only unless otherwise indicated. Expert's Rating 1. What is your birth place? Iran Hong Kong Philippines Russia Taiwan 1 2 3 4 Ethiopia Mexico Nicaragua. Somalia V ietnam_ E l Salvador India Poland Sri Lanka Other(specify). Expert's Comment: - 109 -What is your first language? Amharic Albanian Farsi Polish Russian Somalia Tagalog Tigrina Expert's Comment: Mandarin Cantonese Punjabi Persian Spanish Tamil Other(specify) What is your age? 20 or under 21-25 26-30 31-35. 36-40 41-45 46-50 51-55. 56-60 1 61 or over Expert's Comment: What is your current marital status? Single Married Separated Widowed Divorced Common Law. Expert's Comment: How many children do you have? None One Two Three Four Five or more. Expert's Comment: - 110 -Expert's Rating 6. Indicate the number of child (children) you have, 1 2 3 4 if any, in each age range. Birth-3 years 4-6 years . 7-12 years 13-17 years 18 years and over Expert's Comment: Write down when you immigrated to Canada? ,19 Month Year Expert's Comment: 8. What is the major source of your family's income? 1 2 3 4 Employment Spouse Parents or relatives A.A.P. (government sponsored refugee) Welfare U.I. Other(specify) Expert's Comment: 9. What is the range of your family annual income? Under $10,000 From $15,000 to $19,999 From $25,000 to $29,999 From $40,000 to $49,999 From $10,000 to $14,999. From $20,000 to $24,999_ From $30,000 to $39,999. $50,000 and above Expert's Comment: - I l l -Did you ever work in your home country? Yes No Expert 's Comment: If you worked, what types of job did you do in your home country? (Check as many as applicable) Babysitter Cashier Waitress Doctor Typist Teacher Engineer Others(specify) Housekeeper Hairdresser_ Cook Secretary Draftsperson Accountant_ Counsellor Dressmaker_ Salesperson_ Nurse Office Clerk. Technician Bookkeeper. Labourer Expert 's Comment: If you have worked in Canada, what types of job have you had? (Check as many as applicable) Babysitter Cashier Waitress Doctor Typist Teacher Engineer Others(specify). Housekeeper. Hairdresser Cook Secretary Draftsperson. Accountant Counsellor Dressmaker_ Salesperson_ Nurse Office Clerk. Technician Bookkeeper_ Labourer Expert 's Comment: - 112 -Expert's Rating 13. What is your highest education from your home Country? 1 2 3 4 Primary Secondary Technical or business school College University Other(specify) Expert's Comment: S E C T I O N II - Training Experience This section is about your attitude and experience while you are (were) a student in the Stepping Up Program for immigrant women at I.S.S. Please check( / ) one answer unless otherwise indicated. 14. How long did you have to wait for enrolment after your 1 2 3 4 first contact with I.S.S.? Less than 1 month 1-2 months 3-4 months 5-6 months 7-8 months 9-10 months 11-12 months Over 1 year Expert's Comment: 15. What are the three major reasons for you to enrol in the 1 2 3 4 Stepping Up Program? (Write the letters corresponding to your answers and list them in priority) A . to learn English B. to learn life skills C. to learn job seeking skills D. to learn Canadian culture E. to learn computer basics F. to receive a certificate G. to make friends H. to satisfy self-fulfilment needs I. other(specify) 1. 2. 3. Expert's Comment: - 113 -16. Who made you decide to entre the program? M y own decision Spouse Social worker Relatives Instructor of another course Expert's Comment: Expert's Rating 1 2 3 4 Parents Friends Other(specify) 17. What problems did (do) you have during your participation in this program? (Check as many as applicable) Location of the campus Insufficient English Financial difficulty Lack of home support. Tired after working Child care Personal health Other(specify) Expert's Comment: 18. What class schedule do you prefer the most? 1 2 3 4 Full-time class Morning class only Afternoon class only Evening class only Other(specify) Expert's Comment: 19. How confident are you about finding a job shortly after 1 2 3 4 the training program? Very confident Moderately confident Neutral Moderately unconfident Very unconfident Expert's Comment: - 114 -20. The training program will greatly help me adjust to life in Canada. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree Expert 's Comment: 21. What are your plans upon completion of the program? Expert 's Comment: S E C T I O N III - Curricular Needs Perception This section is designed to assess your learning needs. Please check (/ ) one answer unless otherwise indicated. 22. Indicate your degree of overall satisfaction with Stepping Up Program. Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Expert 's Comment: - 115 -Expert's Rating 23. Which of the following problems are your concerns: 1 .2 3 4 (Check as many as applicable) Uncertainty about the program value Negative experience with instructor(s) Negative experience with classmates Courses do not respond to needs Lack of teaching materials Instruction is boring Too much workload Too little workload Others (Specify as many as you want) Expert's Comment: 24. M y major difficulty in Canada is: (Check as many as 1 2 3 4 as applicable) Employment English Cultural adjustment Life Skills Others (specify) -Expert's Comment: 25. I expect the program to teach more English 1 . 2 3 4 (Check as many as applicable) Grammar Conversation Writing Listening Reading None of the above Expert's Comment: - 116 -Expert's Rating 26. Which of the following do you think is helpful to you? 1 2 3 4 Resume writing Help wanted ads Hidden job market Employment phone techniques_ Interview skills Hidden job market None of the above Expert's Comment: 27. Which of the following do you wish to learn? (Check as many as applicable) Shopping Geography Transportation Housing Banking Canadian politeness. Driving Assertiveness Canadian law Birth Control Health and nutrition Computer basics_ Stress management Hospital and medical system School and educational system Time management and goal setting Others (specify) Expert's Comment: 28. What aspects of the course do you think are the most 1 2 3 4 helpful to you? (Check as many as applicable) Life skills instruction Employment instruction English instruction Computer instruction None of the above Expert's Comment: - 117 -Expert 's Rating 29. Which method helps you learn the best? (Check as many 1 2 3 4 as applicable) Lecture (formal instruction) Discussion (students' participation) Hands-on lessons (e.g. computer class) Audio-visual aids (T.V.) Workshop (guest speaker) Tour (field trip) Expert 's Comment: 30. What type of instructors do you prefer more? Female Male Expert 's Comment: 31. What type of instructors do you feel more helpful? 1 2 3 4 Instructors who speak English and your language Instructors who speak only English Expert 's Comment: 32. What do you want to learn from the program as a women? (Please be as specific as possible) - 118 -Expert ' s Rating Expert 's Comment: 33. What changes do you recommend to the current program based 1 2 3 4 on your experience? (Please be as specific as possible) Expert 's Comment: Questions the expert feels should be added: - 119 -A P P E N D I X III C O V E R I N G L E T T E R T O SUBJECTS A N D Q U E S T I O N N A I R E - 120 -Q U E S T I O N N A I R E Curricular Needs of Immigrant Women in Orientational Training Programs Directions: This questionnaire contains three sections. Some questions require your answer in words while others ask you to check one or more choice(s). Please complete all questions. If you do not fully understand a question, please have someone translate for you and help you answer the question. SECTION I - Background Information Please check ( / ) one answer only unless otherwise indicated. Where are you from? Albania_ India Poland Vietnam China_ Iran Russia E l Salvador. Mexico Somalia Other(specify)_ Ethiopia Nicaragua. Sri Lanka Hong Kong. Philippines_ Taiwan What is your first language? Albanian Amharic. Persian Polish Spanish Tamil Other(specify) Cantonese. Punjabi Filipino Farsi Russian. Tigrina_ Mandarin. Somalia Vietnamese How old are you? 20 or under. 46-50 21-25. 51-55 26-30. 56-60 31-35 61 or over 36-40 4145 What is your current marital status? Single Common Law Married Separated Other(specify). Widowed Divorced How many children do you have? None ' One Two Three Four Five or more - 122 -Indicate the number of child (children) you have, if any, in each age range. Birth-3 years 4-6 years 7-12 years 13-17 years. 18 years and over When did you immigrate to Canada? , 19 Month Year What is the major source of your or your family's income? Employment Spouse Parents or relatives U.I.. Social assistance A.A.P. (Government sponsored refugee) Other(specify) What is the range of your family income each year? Under $10,000 From $10,000 to $14,999. From $15,000 to $19,999 From $20,000 to $24,999. From $25,000 to $29,999 From $30,000 to $39,999. From $40,000 to $49,999 $50,000 and above Did you ever work in your home country? Yes No If you worked in your home country, what types of job(s) did you do? (Check as many as applicable) Accountant Babysitter Bookkeeper Cashier Cook Counsellor Doctor Draftsperson Dressmaker Engineer Hairdresser Housekeeper Labourer Nurse Office Clerk Salesperson Secretary Teacher Technician Typist Waitress Others(specify) If you have worked in Canada, what types of job(s) have you had? (Check as many as applicable) Accountant^ Cook Dressmaker. Labourer Secretary Waitress Babysitter_ Counsellor. Engineer Nurse Teacher Others (specify). Bookkeeper_ Doctor Hairdresser_ Office Clerk. Technician Cashier Draftsperson Housekeeper Salesperson Typist - 123 -13. What is your highest level of education? Primary Secondary Technical or business school. College University Other(specify) SECTION II - Training Experience This section is about your attitude and experience while you are (were) a student in the Stepping Up Program for irnrnigrant women at I.S.S. Please check (/ ) one answer unless otherwise indicated. 14. How long did you have to wait to get into this class after your first meeting with I.S.S.? Less than 1 month 1-2 months 3-4 months 5-6 months_ 7-8 months 9-10 months 11-12 months Over 1 year. 15. What are the three major reasons for you to enter the Stepping Up Program? (Write the letters corre-sponding to your answers in the spaces provided, the most important reason first.) A. to learn English B. to learn life skills C. to learn job seeking skills D. to learn Canadian culture E. to learn computer basics F. to receive a certificate G. to make friends H. to satisfy personal needs I. other (specify) 1. 2. 3. 16. Who influenced you the most to get into the program? M y own decision Spouse Parents Relatives Friends Social worker Instructor of another course Other(specify) 17. What problems did (do) you have when you were attending the program? (Check as many as applicable) Location of the campus Insufficient English Financial difficulty Lack of home support Tired after working Child care Personal health Others (specify) 18. Which class schedule do you like the most? Full-time class Morning class only ; Afternoon class only_ Evening class only Others(specify) - 124 -19. How confident are you or how do you think about finding a job shortly after the training program? Very confident Confident Neutral Unconfident Very unconfident 20. The training program will greatly help you fit into life in Canada. Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 21. What do you want to do after you finish this program? SECTION III - Curricular Needs Perception This section is designed to assess your learning needs. Please check (/ ) one answer unless otherwise indicated. 22. Check your degree of overall satisfaction with the Stepping Up Program. Very Satisfied Satisfied ' Neutral Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied 23. Which of the following do you think were problems for you with the program (Check as many as applicable): Uncertainty about the program value Negative experience with instructor(s) Negative experience with classmates Courses do not respond to needs Lack of teaching materials Instruction is boring Too much workload Too little workload Others (specify as many as you want) 24. M y major difficulty in Canada is: (Check as many as applicable) Employment English Cultural adjustment Life Skills. Other(specify) - 125 -25. I expect the program to teach more English (Check as many as applicable) Grammar Conversation Writing Listening Reading None of the above 26. Which of the following do you think is helpful to you? (Check as many as applicable) Resume writing Help wanted ads Employment phone techniques Interview skills : Hidden job market None of the above 27. Which of the following do you wish to learn? (Check as many as applicable) Shopping Geography Transportation Housing Banking Canadian politeness Driving Assertiveness Canadian law Birth Control Health and nutrition Computer basics Stress management School and educational system Hospital and medical system; Time management and goal setting Others(specify) 28. Which aspects of the course do you think are the most helpful to you? (Check as many as applicable) Life skills instruction Employment instruction English instruction Computer instruction None of the above Others(specify) 29. How do you learn the best? (Check as many as applicable) Lecture (formal instruction) Discussion (student participation) Hands-on lessons (e.g. computer class) Audio-visual aids (e.g. T . V . ) _ Workshop (guest speaker) Tour (field trip) 30. What type of instructors do you prefer? (Check one) Female Male Doesn't matter 31. What type of instructors do you feel are more helpful? Instructors who speak English and your language Instructors who speak only English - 126 -32. Would you recommend the program to a friend? Yes No 33. What do you want to learn from the program as a woman? (Please be as specific as possible) 34. What would you like to change about the program based on your experience? (please be as specific as possible) THIS IS T H E E N D O F T H E Q U E S T I O N N A I R E T H A N K Y O U V E R Y M U C H - 127 -APPENDIX IV SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE - 128 -The purposes of the in-depth interviews were to examine the reliability of the research by comparing the answers of the subjects during the interviews with those on the returned questionnaires, and to assess the validity of the statistical data interpretation. Therefore, the interviews were semi-structured, duplicating some questions from the questionnaire and allow-ing freedom to probe the interviewees' responses. Some sample interview questions are given below. Sample Interview Questions 1. Where were you born? 2. When did you come to Canada? 3. Why did you immigrate to Canada? 4. How did you immigrate to Canada? 5. What kind of job did you have in your home country? 6. Have you worked in Canada? What kinds of jobs? Probe further if necessary ... 7. What difficulties do you have in Canada? 8. Why did you come to the Stepping Up Program? 9. What did you want to learn in the program? Do you think learning life skills (shopping, banking, transportation, housing, etc.) important to you? Why? Do you think learning employment-seeking skills important to you? Why? Do you think learning Canadian culture important to you? Why? Do you think learning English important to you? Why? Do you think learning computer basics important to you? Why? 10. What is your short-term goal? - 129 -11. What is your long-term goal? When listening to the interviewee, probe whenever necessary. - 130 -APPENDIX V RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 33 AND 34 - 131 -Subject No. Question 33 Question 34 1 obtain more information about other training programs and school system, learn Canadian laws program be longer, more English grammar and speaking 2 learn how to live happi ly in Canada increase computer classes, reduce workshops 3 learn communication skills recruit students with same level of English 4 no response no response 5 no response make sure students have same level of English 6 learn Canadian way of life, life skills post system, phone skills, politeness accept only students who really want to learn, follow-up program necessary 7 no response important to have choice of part-time classes, ei-ther morning or afternoon 8 no response no response 9 no response no response 10 learn English communication skills and how to deal wi th people no response 11 no response longer program and more practical training on typ-ing, computer 12 no response longer program, more English grammar and com-munication skills 13 learn basic job-hunting skills, women's rights, laws protecting women, improve English longer program, more practice on English listening 14 learn dealing with culture shock and about Canadian culture more on dealing with culture shock 15 learn more about educational and med-ical systems reduce discussion, teach more about how to apply for a job 16 school system, birth control, Canadian culture, stress manag. more computer for higher level students, more Eng-lish and basic skills for lower levels so they can fine basic jobs 17 how to satisfy personal needs students should have same level of English 18 learn more about where and how women can find work less discussion on shopping, housing; more work on computer and practical things 19 no response more homework, assignments, computer class 20 no response more English grammar, writing, computer; more info on other training program and recreation, e.g. how to spend free time, family events, cultural events 21 life skills, how to adjust to Canadian life prog should be re-organized and become more challenging to meet our needs 22 job-seeking, life skills, computer basics, Canadian culture no response - 132 -Subject No. Question 33 Question 34 23 more info on daycare, training program, community life, teach more computer too many things everybody knows: health and nu-trition, shopping, housing; increase computer class time, take out workshops 24 learn computer skills, become more competent should not accept students who don't want to learn; class discussion a waste of time 25 learn more about computer increase computer time 26 no response increase English instruction 27 no response more interesting and challenging work, materials used not good enough, Canadian lifestyle not so addressed 28 learn computer and employment skills reduce topics like banking, shopping, geography; spend more time on computer and interview, job-seeking skills 29 learn computer skills no response 30 learn home support, childcare skills and communication skills invite more guest speakers, increase field trips 31 learn how to manage family life increase computer teaching 32 learn about self-esteem, women's role in different countries, how to adjust English not challenging, increase discussion on Ca-nadian culture (body language, habit), less lifeskills, e.g. taking bus, shopping and banking; few people need these 33 birth control and interview skills be firm about attendance 34 learn more about Canadian culture, language, and communication skills more discussion on living style and how to adapt to Canadian life 35 how to deal with stress increase English time,' more alternative schedule 36 learn more English, practical skills, computer try to make students' level of English and educa-tion even, increase time on English, computer, typ-ing and more practical skills, reduce useless teach-ing on shopping, taking bus - 133 -A P P E N D I X VI D A T A M A T R I X U S E D FOR C L U S T E R A N A L Y S I S - 134 -SUB Q23(1) Q23(3) Q23(4) Q23(5) Q23(6) Q23(8) Q24(1) Q24(2) Q24(3) Q24(4) Q25(1) Q25(2) Q25(3) Q25(4) Q25(5) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1. 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 .0 0 1 1 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 . 0 1 1 17 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 18 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 23 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 26 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 27 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 28 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 32 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 33 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 34 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 35 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 36 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 - 135 -SUB 0.26(1) Q26(2) 026(3) 026(4) 026(5) 027(2) 027(4) 027(5) 027(6) 027(7) 027(8) 027(9) 027(11) 027(12) 027(13) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 4 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 6 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 8 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 g 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 10 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 12 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 13 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 14 1 1. 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 16 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 17 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 18 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 22 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 23 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 / 0 1 1 24 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 25 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 26 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 27 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 28 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 29 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 30 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 32 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 33 0 1 0 • 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 34 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 35 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 36 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 - 136 -SUB Q27(14) Q27(15) Q27(16) Q28(1) Q28(2) Q28(3) Q28(4) Q29(1) Q29(2) Q29(3) Q29(4) Q29(5) Q29(6) Q30(1) Q31(1) 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 9 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 12 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 13 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 14 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 15 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 17 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 . 0 18 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 19 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 21 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 22 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 23 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 24 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 25 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 27 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 28 . 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 29 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 30 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 32 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 35 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 36 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 - 137 -

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054844/manifest

Comment

Related Items