UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Enrollment, a decision making perspective Musa, Musa B. 1982

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

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A2 M97.pdf [ 10.26MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055870.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055870-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055870-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055870-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055870-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055870-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055870-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055870-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055870.ris

Full Text

Enrollment: A De c i s i o n Making P e r s p e c t i v e by Musa B. Musa A. (Educ.), Ahmadu B e l l o U n i v e r s i t y , Z a r i a , 1974 M. Ed., U n i v e r s i t y of Lagos, 1979 DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Adult Education) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J u l y 1982 © Musa Bata Musa, 1982 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. / Department of W ^ v * " / " T T A J F Q*MJ1 fc^^ The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 D a t e i i j - JK»VA^ i q . S " ^ DE-6 (3/81) i i ABSTRACT Adult enrollment rates i n c o n t i n u i n g education are low. This c o n s t i t u t e s a major concern for program providers since f i n a n c i n g of programs i s based on enrollment. Adult education researchers have i n v e s t i g a t e d the g l o b a l concept of p a r t i c i p a t i o n n e g l e c t i n g the question of enrollment d e c i s i o n making. P a r t i c i p a t i o n -- the act of taking part i n a s p e c i f i c program i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d from enrollment--the process of d e c i d i n g whether to p r e - r e g i s t e r i n a program. This study examined what combination of s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s "best" p r e d i c t e d enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Beginning with Vroom's (1964) force and valence p r o p o s i t i o n s , m o d i f i c a t i o n s were made using the concept of importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) and adding contextual v a r i a b l e s to produce expressive-force and instrumental-valence models. The modified models provided the schema for t e s t i n g the f o l l o w i n g hypotheses: ( i ) the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model are equal and ( i i ) the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model are equal for p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n a formal educational program. Mailed questionnaires were sent to 133 e n r o l l e e s and 400 non-e n r o l l e e s . Of these numbers, 95 and 114 r e s p e c t i v e l y , were returned. E i g h t y - e i g h t questionnaires were useable i n each group. The data were analysed using SPSS Discriminant a n a l y s i s computer program. Results showed that s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of a program and a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s perception of h i s employer's a t t i t u d e regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e were the primary p r e d i c t o r s of enrollment d e c i s i o n making in the four modified models. P r e d i c t i v e accuracy was augmented mar g i n a l l y by valence i n the a d d i t i v e model and, for each of the remaining models by the re s p e c t i v e m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the expectancy v a r i a b l e s . The mailed brochure was the promotional device most reported as the p r i n c i p a l source of information about the program. To improve the l i k e l i h o o d of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s making p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n s , programmers were urged: ( i ) to work c l o s e l y with employers of t h e i r c l i e n t e l e to ensure the s u i t a b i l i t y of the timing of t h e i r programs; and ( i i ) to provide for expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s . The paramount importance of using contextual v a r i a b l e s in enrollment d e c i s i o n making research was emphasized. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i i LIST OF TABLES , v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ix CHAPTER I:INTRODUCTION 1 D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g The Concepts Of P a r t i c i p a t i o n And Enrollment 5 Conceptual Systems Used To I n v e s t i g a t e D e c i s i o n Making Behavior 9 The Problem 15 Research Questions 17 O r g a n i z a t i o n Of The D i s s e r t a t i o n 18 CHAPTER I I : ENROLLMENT DECISION MAKING: REVIEW OF ADULT EDUCATION LITERATURE 19 The Inadequacy Of The Conceptual Premise Of P a r t i c i p a t i o n Research 20 P a r t i c i p a t i o n Research Bear i n g On Enrollment D e c i s i o n Making 23 Summary 34 CHAPTER I I I : PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MOTIVATION: THE FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS 36 A Review Of Three P s y c h o l o g i c a l O r i e n t a t i o n s To M o t i v a t i o n 36 Vroom's Valence And Force P r o p o s i t i o n s 41 M o d i f i c a t i o n s To The Valence And Force Models 45 Ad a p t a t i o n Of The M o d i f i e d F o r c e And Valence Models 50 V Hypotheses 57 Summary 57 CHAPTER IV: INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT 59 C i r c u m s t a n c e s That N e c e s s i t a t e d The Development Of The Instrument . . . •. 60 D e t e r m i n i n g O b j e c t i v e s For Use In Expectancy Theory Research 60 Review Of P r e v i o u s Measurement Of Expectancy Theory And A d u l t E d u c a t i o n V a r i a b l e s 63 D e t e r m i n i n g O b j e c t i v e s P e r t i n e n t To The Context Of Chautauqua By The P a c i f i c 71 D e t e r m i n i n g I n s t r u m e n t ' s C o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y 77 O p e r a t i o n a l D e f i n i t i o n s Of The P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s 79 D r a f t Instrument 85 P i l o t Test 86 Post P i l o t Study Amendments To The Q u e s t i o n n a i r e 93 Summary 96 CHAPTER V: DESIGN OF THE STUDY 98 Conte x t Of The Study 98 P o p u l a t i o n 102 Samples 103 Data C o l l e c t i o n 1 08 Data A n a l y s e s 109 CHAPTER V I : RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 112 Response Rate 112 Socio-demographic And E d u c a t i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Of E n r o l l e e s And N o n - e n r o l l e e s 114 R e l i a b i l i t y Of The I n s t r u m e n t s Used To Measure The Expectancy V a r i a b l e s In The Expressive-Force And Instrumental-Valence Models 122 Comparative P r e d i c t i v e Accuracies Of The Expressive,Instrumental And The M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Expressive-Force And Instrumental-Valence Models 124 P r e d i c t i v e Accuracies Of The A d d i t i v e Versus M u l t i p l i c a t i v e Forms Of The Combined Exprssive-Force And Instrumental-Valence Model 140 Summary 142 CHAPTER V I I : SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 145 Summary And Conclusions 146 L i m i t a t i o n s Of The Study 152 Im p l i c a t i o n s Of The Study 156 BIBLIOGRAPHY 169 APPENDIX A: CORRESPONDENCE SEEKING APPROVAL TO CONDUCT STUDY AND INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT 174 APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE PACKAGE MAILED TO RESPONDENTS 206 APPENDIX C: MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES FOR THE ENROLLEE AND NON-ENROLLEE SAMPLES 230 APPENDIX D: ADDITIVE VERSUS MULTIPLICATIVE COMBINATION OF THE COMBINED EXPRESSIVE-FORCE AND VALENCE MODEL 233 v i i LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Summary Of Models Proposed 56 Table 2: Judges' C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Of Objectives 74 Table 3: Expressive Ob j ect i ves : P i l o t Test 78 Table 4: Instrumental O b j e c t i v e s : P i l o t Test 79 Table 5: P i l o t Study: Socio-demographic And Educational C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Of E n r o l l e e s And Non-enrollees 88 Table 6: P i l o t Test: Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , And R e l i a b i l i t i e s Of The Expectancy Theory Components Of The Models 93 Table 7: Chautauqua By The P a c i f i c Enrollment H i s t o r y , 1973-1981 100 Table 8: Stages In The Mail-out Of Questionnaires To E n r o l l e e s 105 Table 9: Non-enrollees Sampling Chart 106 Table 10: Socio-demographic And Educational C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s Of E n r o l l e e s And Non-enrollees 115 Table 11: Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , And R e l i a b i l i t i e s Of The Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s In The Expressive-Force And Instrumental-Valence Models 123 Table 12: M u l t i p l e And Zero Order C o r r e l a t i o n s Between P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s And Decision To E n r o l l 125 Table 13: C o r r e l a t i o n s Between The P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s 127 Table 14: Summary S t a t i s t i c s D i s c r i m i n a n t Function A n a l y s i s : Expressive-Force Model 131 Table 15: C l a s s i f i c a t i o n R e sults Of E n r o l l e e s And Non-v i i i e n r o l l e e s Based On Time, Employer And The Expressive-Force Score: Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s 133 Table 16: Summary S t a t i s t i c s D i scriminant Function A n a l y s i s : Instrumental-Valence Model 134 Table 17: C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results Of E n r o l l e e s And Non-e n r o l l e e s Based On Time, Employer And The Instrumental-Valence Score: Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s 136 Table 18: Summary S t a t i s t i c s Discriminant Function A n a l y s i s : M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Expressive-Force And Instrumental-Valence Model 137 Table 19: C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results Of E n r o l l e e s And Non-e n r o l l e e s Based On Time, Employer And The Score Of The M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Force And Valence Model 139 i x ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would l i k e to express my indebtedness to the chairman of my do c t o r a l committee, Dr. W i l l i a m S. G r i f f i t h , and to committee members, Dr. Vincent D'Oyley and Dr. W. Todd Rogers for t h e i r guidance and c o n s t r u c t i v e suggestions from the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the problem to the f i n a l form of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . My g r a t i t u d e a l s o goes to my academic mentor Professor Lalage Bown for her support and encouragement. Ap p r e c i a t i o n i s a l s o extended to J i n d r a K u l i c h , D i r e c t o r of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre for Continuing Education and Elayne H a r r i s , Program D i r e c t o r of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c , 1981, f or access to Chautauqua c l i e n t e l e and for sharing the ques t i o n n a i r e postage c o s t s . The continuing cooperation and ass i s t a n c e of the s t a f f of the Education Graduate Programs O f f i c e , F a c u l t y of Education, d i r e c t e d by Dr. L. B. Da n i e l s , i s a l s o acknowledged. Thanks i s due to MarDell C. P a r r i s h and Jackson C.S. Hui f o r word processing the document. I wish to express my g r a t i t u d e to the Federal Government of N i g e r i a for awarding me the s c h o l a r s h i p to undertake t h i s study and to the U n i v e r s i t y of Lagos for grant i n g me a paid leave of absence. Formost, I am g r a t e f u l to my wife, Maryamu, and c h i l d r e n M s i r a l i , Hurku and Suwang for t h e i r patience i n t o l e r a t i n g my absence during my academic sojourn i n Vancouver. F i n a l l y , my g r a t i t u d e i s extended to others who were h e l p f u l but too numerous to name. 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Adult enrollment rates in continuing education are low. For example, i n Canada and the United States l e s s than two percent of the under-educated adult population choose to e n r o l l i n Adult Basic Education programs (Cross, 1980). S i m i l a r l y , where labour unions have negotiated c o n t r a c t s a l l o w i n g f o r paid educational leave or t u i t i o n a s s i s t a n c e programs, l e s s than two percent of the e l i g i b l e members take advantage of a v a i l a b l e educational o p p o r t u n i t i e s (Peterson, 1980). And at l e a s t 50% of p r a c t i c i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s do not v o l u n t a r i l y e n r o l l in continuing p r o f e s s i o n a l education programs provided by u n i v e r s i t i e s and other p r o f e s s i o n a l s o c i e t i e s (Cross, 1981). These c o n s i s t e n t l y low enrollment f i g u r e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y among the undereducated, have concerned d i r e c t o r s and programmers of contin u i n g education o r g a n i z a t i o n s (Waniewicz, 1976). E f f o r t s by researchers who have examined t h i s issue have given r i s e to what i s known i n the f i e l d of adult education as the p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e . V a r i a b l e s that have been examined include the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p a r t i c i p a n t s such as gender, age, l e v e l of education, employment status and place of residence (Johnstone and Ri v e r a , 1965); the reasons for p a r t i c i p a t i o n ' (Houle, 1961); and the l e a r n i n g environment i n which p a r t i c i p a t i o n occurs (Havighurst 1964; Marcus 1976). 2 Johnstone and Rivera (1965) c a r r i e d out a n a t i o n a l survey of 12,000 American households i n which they attempted to determine among other things "What are adult education p a r t i c i p a n t s l i k e ?". They concluded t h a t : The adult education p a r t i c i p a n t i s j u s t as often a woman as a man, i s t y p i c a l l y under f o r t y , has completed high school or more, enjoys an above-average income, works f u l l - t i m e and most often i n a white-c o l l a r occupation, i s married and has c h i l d r e n , l i v e s i n an urbanized area but more l i k e l y in a suburb than a large c i t y , and i s found i n a l l p a r t s of the country, but more frequently i n the West than i n other regions. (p.8) Cross (1980) made a synopsis of the f i n d i n g s of more than 30 l a r g e - s c a l e surveys i n which the preferences and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of adult l e a r n e r s w i t h i n the l a s t decade were examined,, She found a p r o f i l e s i m i l a r to that reported by Johnstone and Rivera (1965). Houle (1961) interviewed 22 c o n t i n u i n g l e a r n e r s e n r o l l e d i n educational programs to determine why they had decided to p a r t i c i p a t e . He i d e n t i f i e d three m o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n s : ( i ) the g o a l - o r i e n t e d who learn to achieve s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s ; ( i i ) the a c t i v i t y - o r i e n t e d who l e a r n to develop s o c i a l contacts and r e l a t i o n s h i p s with others; and ( i i i ) the l e a r n i n g - o r i e n t e d who l e a r n for the joy of a c q u i r i n g knowledge fo r i t s own sake. Subsequently, a number of f a c t o r a n a l y t i c s t u d i e s have been performed to v e r i f y and expand h i s t y p o l o g i e s . Burgess (1971), for example, i d e n t i f i e d seven f a c t o r s : ( i ) the d e s i r e to know; ( i i ) the d e s i r e to reach a personal goal; ( i i i ) the d e s i r e to reach a s o c i a l g o a l ; ( i v ) the d e s i r e to reach a r e l i g i o u s g o a l ; (v) the d e s i r e to escape; ( v i ) the d e s i r e to take part i n an 3 a c t i v i t y ; and ( v i i ) the d e s i r e to comply with formal requirements. S i m i l a r l y , Morstain and Smart (1974) i d e n t i f i e d f i v e adult learner types: ( i ) non-directed l e a r n e r s ; ( i i ) s o c i a l l e a r n e r s ; ( i i i ) s t i m u l a t i o n - s e e k i n g l e a r n e r s ; ( i v ) career-o r i e n t e d l e a r n e r s ; and (v) l i f e change l e a r n e r s . Cross (1981), summing up the research e f f o r t s that attempted to f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e Houle's typology, concluded t h a t : The more s o p h i s t i c a t e d s t a t i s t i c a l s tudies purporting to t e s t Houle's three-way typology have i l l u m i n a t e d rather than changed Houle's basic c o n c l u s i o n s . T y p i c a l l y , they include Houle's cat e g o r i e s but add between two and f i v e f a c t o r s , often s u b - d i v i d i n g one of Houle's categories but r a r e l y adding a completely new dimension.(p. 96) Besides research e f f o r t s d i r e c t e d at understanding the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the " t y p i c a l " adult learner as w e l l as what motivates him to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a l e a r n i n g program, other s t u d i e s have focused on what occurs i n the l e a r n i n g environment. Havighurst (1964) suggested that the o b j e c t i v e s which an i n d i v i d u a l perceives he could achieve by p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a c o n t i n u i n g education program could be c l a s s i f i e d as e i t h e r " i n s t r u m e n t a l " or "expressive". He went on to e x p l a i n t h a t : Instrumental education means education for a goal which l i e s outside and beyond the act of education... the learner as a young adult s t u d i e s i n h i s v o c a t i o n a l f i e l d so as to get a promotion, or studies cooking so as to become a better housewife. Instrumental education i s thus a kind of investment of time and energy i n the expectation of future gain. Expressive education means education for a goal which l i e s w i t h i n the act of l e a r n i n g , or i s so c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to i t that the act of l e a r n i n g appears to be the goal....For example, the learner s t u d i e s a r i t h m e t i c for the pleasure of l e a r n i n g about numbers and q u a n t i t i e s . The l e a r n i n g of a r i t h m e t i c i s i t s own 4 r e w a r d . . . . E x p r e s s i v e e d u c a t i o n i s a k i n d o f c o n s u m p t i o n of t i m e and e n e r g y f o r p r e s e n t g a i n . ( p p . 17-18) Marc u s ( 1 9 7 6 ) , u s i n g H a v i g h u r s t ' s n o t i o n of e x p r e s s i v e and i n s t r u m e n t a l o b j e c t i v e s , f o u n d , as had been p o s i t e d by H a v i g h u r s t , t h a t : A d u l t e d u c a t i o n p a r t i c i p a n t s do t e n d t o d i s c r i m i n a t e p e r c e p t u a l l y between t h e c o n c u r r e n t ( e x p r e s s i v e ) u s e f u l n e s s of t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i t s d e f e r r e d ( i n s t r u m e n t a l ) u s e f u l n e s s . ( p . 257) M a r c u s ' c o n c l u s i o n i s a l s o c o n s o n a n t w i t h t h e f i n d i n g s o f m o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n r e s e a r c h e r s t h a t i n d i c a t e d t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s t a k e p a r t i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r d i f f e r e n t r e a s o n s ( H o u l e , 1961; C r o s s , 1981). Taken t o g e t h e r , t h e l i t e r a t u r e on p a r t i c i p a t i o n encompasses d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of t h e a d u l t l e a r n e r a l r e a d y p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l p r ogram. The q u e s t i o n o f how p o t e n t i a l a d u l t l e a r n e r s d e c i d e t o e n r o l l i n a s p e c i f i c c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n program, t h e f o c u s of t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y , has r e c e i v e d c o m p a r a t i v e l y l i t t l e a t t e n t i o n from a d u l t e d u c a t i o n r e s e a r c h e r s . Most i n v e s t i g a t o r s who have a t t e m p t e d t o examine t h e i s s u e of e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n making ( M i l l e r , 1967; Mezirow, 1971; Rubenson, 1976; M o r s t a i n and Smart, 1977; C r o s s , 1981) have done so i n t h e a b s e n c e o f e m p i r i c a l e v i d e n c e . F o r example, M o r s t a i n and Smart ( 1 9 7 7 ) , i n t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n of t h e r e a s o n s why a d u l t s t u d e n t s e n r o l l i n u n i v e r s i t y p r o g r a m s , n o t e d t h a t : W i t h r e s p e c t t o r e s e a r c h i n t h i s a r e a , i n c r e a s e d a t t e n t i o n has f o c u s e d on t h e m o t i v a t i o n s of a d u l t s w h i c h a r e t h o u g h t t o i n f l u e n c e t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs and c o u r s e s of s t u d y . T h i s i s a 5 welcome development, since most i n s t i t u t i o n s have very l i t t l e e m p i r i c a l information on the reasons underlying adult l e a r n e r s ' d e c i s i o n s to e n r o l l i n educational a c t i v i t i e s . (p. 666) The research r e f e r r e d to by Morstain and Smart p e r t a i n s to the p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e which deals s p e c i f i c a l l y with a d u l t s already i n the context of l e a r n i n g . They suggested that f i n d i n g s from such research w i l l f a c i l i t a t e knowledge regarding the "reasons underlying adult l e a r n e r s ' d e c i s i o n s to e n r o l l i n educational a c t i v i t i e s " (1977, p. 666). However, e x t r a p o l a t i o n of f i n d i n g s based on studies of a c t u a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s regarding enrollment d e c i s i o n making presents a major conceptual problem. To f a c i l i t a t e the c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h i s i s s u e , i t i s f i r s t necessary to d i s t i n g u i s h between the concepts of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and enrollment. Di f ferent i a t ing the Concepts of  Part i c i pat ion and Enrollment In t h i s s e c t i o n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s f i r s t d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from enrollment followed by a d i s c u s s i o n of the importance of pre-r e g i s t r a t i o n data for a c o n t i n u i n g education programmer. Part i c i pat ion and Enrollment The concept of p a r t i c i p a t i o n has been t r e a t e d i n the adult education l i t e r a t u r e as a u n i t a r y a c t . I n d i v i d u a l s are simply described i n one of two c a t e g o r i e s : p a r t i c i p a n t s who take part in a p a r t i c u l a r program of i n t e r e s t , and n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s who do not. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i s not, however, a s i n g l e a c t . I t i s a sequence of d e c i s i o n s and a c t i o n s . For example, an i n d i v i d u a l may choose whether or not to e n r o l l for a program ( i . e . 6 d e c i d i n g i n advance of the scheduled date i n which a program would be conducted i f he w i l l or w i l l not p r e - r e g i s t e r ) . Assuming he decides to p r e - r e g i s t e r and f o l l o w s through with a c t u a l r e g i s t r a t i o n (enrollment), he s t i l l has to decide whether or not he w i l l a c t u a l l y take part in the program ( i . e . p a r t i c i p a t e i n the s p e c i f i c program for which he has pre-r e g i s t e r e d ) . Having choosen i n i t i a l l y to take part i n the program and having been present for the f i r s t p a r t , which may c o n s i s t of a s i n g l e c l a s s meeting or an extended s e r i e s of c l a s s e s , he s t i l l has to decide whether to continue to take part ( p e r s i s t ) or to discontinue h i s involvement (drop o u t ) . Those who continue or discontinue have been studied e x t e n s i v e l y by researchers who are concerned with p e r s i s t e n c e and dropout (Boshier,, 1973) . There i s , however, a lack of research which attempts to deal with the making of the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l as a d i s c r e t e step i n the sequence of processes which together c o n s t i t u t e the concept of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . At a general l e v e l , every i n d i v i d u a l can be designated as a p o t e n t i a l l e a r n e r . A l l i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l at some time in the course of t h e i r d a i l y l i f e experience the need to achieve some de s i r e d o b j e c t i v e ( s ) which they perceive w i l l give them mastery over t h e i r environment. A p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t i s a p o t e n t i a l learner who has been made aware of the existence of a s p e c i f i c educational program. I n s t i t u t i o n a l providers i d e n t i f y a segment of the population i n a given s o c i e t y and design s p e c i f i c educational 7 programs which they b e l i e v e w i l l be perceived by t h e i r target population ( p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s as indexed by the f a c t that such i n d i v i d u a l s are on the i n s t i t u t i o n a l m a i l i n g l i s t ) as those which w i l l f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . Various promotional techniques (mailed brochures and f l y e r s ) are u s u a l l y used to convey the existence of such programs to p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s . A p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t r e c e i v i n g promotional m a t e r i a l has the choice to e n r o l l or not in the program (no cl a i m i s made here that the choice i s dependent upon the promotional m a t e r i a l ) . I n d i v i d u a l s who pre-r e g i s t e r f or the program are designated as e n r o l l e e s . P o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who make a negative enrollment d e c i s i o n and those who f a i l to p r e - r e g i s t e r for any other reasons are c l a s s i f i e d as non-enrollees. The e n r o l l e e category contains two subgroups c o n s i s t i n g of those who e n r o l l and a c t u a l l y take part in the program and those who e n r o l l but subsequently do not take part as they had a n t i c i p a t e d . Accordingly, t h i s approach r e f i n e s and elaborates the conventional dichotomous c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t or non- p a r t i c i p a n t i n t o f u r t h e r s u b c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s which r e f l e c t the complexity of the phenomenon of p a r t i c i p a t i o n more p r e c i s e l y than i s p o s s i b l e with a simple dichotomy. The Importance of P r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n Figures From the perspective of an adult educator planning a program, i t i s often e s s e n t i a l to make a d e c i s i o n about whether or not a program which has been planned and ad v e r t i s e d w i l l 8 a c t u a l l y be conducted or i f i t w i l l be c a n c e l l e d to avoid i n c u r r i n g costs which cannot be met from the a n t i c i p a t e d revenue. In c a l c u l a t i n g - the a n t i c i p a t e d revenue the adult educator attempts to obtain the best p o s s i b l e estimates of the number of people who w i l l a c t u a l l y be t a k i n g part i n a program. To obtain an estimate he w i l l arrange for p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n , that i s to have p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s i n d i c a t e t h e i r i n t e n t i o n s to take part s e v e r a l days or weeks i n advance of the beginning date of the program he has a d v e r t i s e d . Such p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n f i g u r e s w i l l give him a sound basi s for making h i s estimate of the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s . I t should f u r t h e r be noted that while a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t might make a p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n he may or may not fo l l o w t h i s up with a c t u a l r e g i s t r a t i o n . Experience i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of adult education programming, however, seems to suggest that r e l a t i v e l y few people a c t u a l l y pre-r e g i s t e r and then f a i l to appear for the s p e c i f i c program ( G r i f f i t h , 1982). Accordingly, the p r a c t i s i n g adult educator i s i n t e r e s t e d i n the number of people who p r e - r e g i s t e r because that information i s u s e f u l for c a l c u l a t i n g the estimated p r o f i t or l o s s for a given planned and promoted program. This information w i l l enable him to decide whether or not to proceed to conduct the program or to cancel i t to c o n t r o l h i s a n t i c i p a t e d l o s s e s i n the event of low p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n . This process by which p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s choose whether or not to p r e - r e g i s t e r may be c a l l e d 9 enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Where, however, the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of the i n d i v i d u a l s who receive the promotional m a t e r i a l on a program does not r e s u l t in an adequate number of p o s i t i v e d e c i s i o n s to e n r o l l ( i e . p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n s ) to cover the a n t i c i p a t e d costs of the program, the planner may cancel the program, r e s u l t i n g in an apparent anomaly, that i s , a s i t u a t i o n in which i n d i v i d u a l s have made a d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l but i n such l i m i t e d numbers that the program for which they have e n r o l l e d i s c a n c e l l e d . A c c o r d i n g l y , i t i s both concept u a l l y and p r a c t i c a l l y sound to consider enrollment d e c i s i o n making as a d i s c r e t e process w i t h i n the l a r g e r construct of p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Conceptual Systems Used to In v e s t i g a t e  Decision Making Behavior De c i s i o n making i n areas such as economics, mathematics, and psychology has been studied e x t e n s i v e l y . In economics and mathematics, d e c i s i o n making under c o n d i t i o n s of r i s k has been examined w i t h i n the framework of the dominant normative theory of the s u b j e c t i v e l y expected u t i l i t y (SEU) model (Edwards, 1954;1961; S l o v i c , et a l . , 1977). With t h i s model, i t i s assumed that people seek to maximize the sum of the product of the u t i l i t y and the p r o b a b i l i t y of a l t e r n a t i v e means of achieving d e s i r e d outcomes. The adequacy of the SEU model has been questioned; e m p i r i c a l evidence i n d i c a t e s that there i s an i n t e r a c t i o n between u t i l i t i e s and p r o b a b i l i t i e s and that preferences are s t o c h a s t i c rather than d e t e r m i n i s t i c (Edwards, 10 1954; 1961; Taylor, 1965; Feldman and Kanter, 1965). Furthermore, t h i s model has a l s o been c r i t i c i s e d f or not ta k i n g i n t o account s i t u a t i o n a l f a c t o r s (Kunreuther 1976). Vroom (1964), working i n the area of i n d i v i d u a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l psychology, presented a valence and a force p r o p o s i t i o n r e s p e c t i v e l y . In the f i r s t p r o p o s i t i o n , the i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y and valence for each outcome i n a s e r i e s are f i r s t m u l t i p l i e d and then summed across the outcomes of the s e r i e s . This y i e l d s what Vroom c a l l e d the p r e d i c t o r score of the valence p r o p o s i t i o n which p r e d i c t s the valence of outcomes (p.18). S i m i l a r l y , in the force p r o p o s i t i o n , the expectancy and valence for each outcome i n a s e r i e s are f i r s t m u l t i p l i e d and then summed across the outcomes of the s e r i e s . This y i e l d s the p r e d i c t o r score of the force p r o p o s i t i o n which p r e d i c t s the force toward behavior or a c t i o n to achieve those outcomes (p.19). According to Vroom (1964) the term a c t i o n r e f e r s "to behavior which might reasonably be expected to be w i t h i n the r e p e r t o i r e of the person ... while the term outcomes ( r e f e r s to) more d i s t a n t events which are l e s s l i k e l y to be under complete behavioral c o n t r o l " (p.19). In t h i s regard, M i t c h e l l (1974) defined outcomes as "simply anything an i n d i v i d u a l might want to a t t a i n " (p.1053). According to Vroom (1964), the valence of an outcome for a person r e f e r s to the person's a f f e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n s (which could be p o s i t i v e or negative) toward the p a r t i c u l a r outcome. The cognized i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of a given outcome i s defined conceptually as the degree to which an i n d i v i d u a l perceives the 11 outcome in question as f a c i l i t a t i n g the attainment of other outcomes. According to Vroom (1964), the valence p r o p o s i t i o n therefore p r e d i c t s the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l perceives the attainment of outcome B to be dependent on having a t t a i n e d outcome A. The force p r o p o s i t i o n s p e c i f i e s how valences and expectancies combine i n determining choices of a c t i o n . In t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n , a force i s conceptualized as a h y p o t h e t i c a l c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r that c o n t r o l s behavior (Vroom,1964). The valence of an outcome was defined above. Expectancy i s " a momentary b e l i e f concerning the l i k e l i h o o d that a p a r t i c u l a r act w i l l be followed by a p a r t i c u l a r outcome" (Vroom, 1964, p. 17). Together, valence and expectancy are used to p r e d i c t the force toward behavior. U n l i k e the SEU model, the expectancy theory p r o p o s i t i o n s presented by Vroom (1964) deal l e s s with the development of axioms of normative choice behavior and more with d e s c r i b i n g , e x p l a i n i n g and p r e d i c t i n g r e a l l i f e or a c t u a l choice behavior, whether i t i s r a t i o n a l i n the normative sense or not (Wahba and House, 1974). Since Vroom (1964) made h i s o r i g i n a l p r e s e n t a t i o n , researchers working w i t h i n the expectancy theory research t r a d i t i o n have made a number of conceptual and methodological m o d i f i c a t i o n s to h i s framework. Vroom's valence and force p r o p o s i t i o n s have been designated as models; and the components of the valence and the force models have been combined to 1 2 p r e d i c t the valence of job e f f o r t ( M i t c h e l l , 1974, pp.1053-1055). The question of which form of mathematical combination ( a d d i t i v e or m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of the components of the models has more p r e d i c t i v e accuracy has a l s o been r a i s e d (Wahba and House, 1974; M i t c h e l l , 1974; 1981). Parker and Dyer (1976) have suggested the need to make a conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n between valence of outcomes and the importance of those outcomes. Furthermore, attempts have been made to extend the valence and force models using environmental or contextual v a r i a b l e s to p r e d i c t behavior ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen 1973; Parker and Dyer, 1976), and the need to continue research i n t h i s area has been suggested (Parker and Dyer, 1976). Extensions of Vroom's models i n terms of personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s are relevant to the context of the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n . Researchers i n adult education have suggested that the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c e the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of ad u l t s i n conti n u i n g education: ( i ) a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s perceived expectations of s i g n i f i c a n t others such as f r i e n d s , family and employer ( M i l l e r , 1967; Peterson, 1980; Cross 1981); ( i i ) educational e f f i c a c y - - a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s b e l i e f i n education as a means of gaining mastery over h i s environment (Knox, 1977); ( i i i ) educational e f f i c a c y expectation --a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s b e l i e f s about h i s a b i l i t y to execute a program content (Bandura 1977a) and ( i v ) the s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of a program (Cla r k e , 1971; Houle, 1972; Carp, et a l . 1974; Wan i e w i c z , 1 9 7 6 ) . 13 For example, a p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e learns about a program through a brochure.. Among a range of issues that he might l i k e l y consider in the process of h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making, i s how h i s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l might a f f e c t the regular routine of h i s f a m i l y . The p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l could e n t a i l r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e or no d i s r u p t i o n to h i s family or i t might c a l l f or a great deal of temporary r e o r g a n i z a t i o n . The p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n could be inf l u e n c e d by h i s perception of h i s fami l y ' s expectations and h i s motivation to comply with those perceived expectations. Furthermore, before deciding to e n r o l l i n a program, a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t w i l l very often seek f u r t h e r information on a v a r i e t y of issues among which i s the extent to which experience i n the program w i l l enable him to a t t a i n the o b j e c t i v e s he c u r r e n t l y d e s i r e s . He may enquire for more information from the p r o v i d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n . Should he have f r i e n d s who have had experience with the program or i n s t i t u t i o n , he may seek t h e i r opinion about the program. Accordingly, the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making might be influenced by h i s perception of h i s f r i e n d ' s expectations, and h i s motivation to comply with those perceived expectations. S i m i l a r l y , an employer may be aware of a program that might enhance an employee's p r o f e s s i o n a l development. The employer may suggest p a r t i c i p a t i o n to the employee (assuming p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s not mandatory). I f i t occurs that the 14 employee's expectation of what p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the s p e c i f i c program w i l l enable him to accomplish i s at variance with the expectation of h i s employer, then the extent to which he w i l l be motivated to comply with h i s employer's expectations w i l l be inf l u e n c e d a c c o r d i n g l y . Furthermore, for an employee to be able to make a p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n , he would need to be assured of a favorable d i s p o s i t i o n on the part of h i s employer to enable him to take time o f f to p a r t i c i p a t e . Every i n d i v i d u a l at some point i s faced with the need to achieve some o b j e c t i v e s which he expects w i l l enable him to e x i s t more comfortably i n h i s environment. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an educational program i s one means which the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t might consider as l i k e l y to f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of h i s des i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . However, whether or not he decides to e n r o l l in a program as a means of achieving h i s o b j e c t i v e s w i l l be i n f l u e n c e d by the extent to which he b e l i e v e s that through p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the program he can gain mastery of h i s environment (educational e f f i c a c y ) . An adult c o n s i d e r i n g whether or not to e n r o l l i n an educational program as a means of achieving h i s des i r e d o b j e c t i v e s i s known to be concerned about h i s a b i l i t y to perform while p a r t i c i p a t i n g in the program (educational e f f i c a c y e x p e c t a t i o n ) . Consequently, h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making w i l l be i n f l u e n c e d by the extent to which he b e l i e v e s he can execute the program content. Most i n d i v i d u a l s have a range of commitments to which they 15 must attend in the course of t h e i r d a i l y l i v e s . Such engagements might include job requirements, family r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and s o c i a l i z i n g with f r i e n d s . Consequently, the time at which a program i s scheduled has to be convenient for him to attend in l i g h t of h i s other commitments. Acc o r d i n g l y , h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making w i l l be influenced by the s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of the program. The Problem The focus of the present study was upon enrollment d e c i s i o n making as indexed by p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n for a s p e c i f i c c o n t i n u i n g education program. The understanding of the f a c t o r s that i n f l u e n c e adult enrollment d e c i s i o n making are of major concern to programmers i n i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s . This p r o p o s i t i o n i s premised on the f a c t that the d e c i s i o n to e i t h e r finance the i n t r o d u c t i o n of a new program or to continue p r o v i d i n g an e x i s t i n g one tends l a r g e l y to be based on the number of i n d i v i d u a l s who p r e - r e g i s t e r i n a program before i t s scheduled commencement date (Clark, 1958; Mezirow, et a l . , 1975). Consequently, the problem addressed in t h i s study was that of determining what combination of s e l e c t e d expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s and personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s considered simultaneously served best to d i s t i n g u i s h between p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who subsequently e n r o l l e d i n an adult education program and those who d i d not. I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of such v a r i a b l e s would enable i n s t i t u t i o n a l program planners to be more e f f e c t i v e i n t h e i r promotional a c t i v i t i e s . 16 Following Havighurst (1964), the valence model modified by importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) and augmented with s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s , was r e f e r r e d to as the instrumental-valence model. S i m i l a r l y , f o l l o w i n g Havighurst (1964), the force model modified by importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) i n concert with s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s , was c a l l e d the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model. The m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined components of the instrumental-valence and ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e models, as suggested by Parker and Dyer(l976), analysed simultaneously with c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e s was c a l l e d the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model; while i t s a d d i t i v e l y combined v a r i a n t was c a l l e d the a d d i t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model. The contextual v a r i a b l e s examined were: i ) p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e ' s perceived expectation of h i s f r i e n d s , f a m i l y , and employer, regarding h i s p o s s i b l e d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n an educational program, and h i s motivation to comply with those perceived expectations; i i ) educational e f f i c a c y - - t h e p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e ' s b e l i e f that through p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the program he could gain mastery of h i s environment; i i i ) educational e f f i c a c y expectation--the extent to which the p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e b e l i e v e d he had the a b i l i t y to execute the program content; and i v ) s u i t a b i l i t y of t i m e — t h e extent to which the s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of the program i n f l u e n c e d the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t . 1 7 Research Quest ions A p r i n c i p a l and a secondary research question were addressed i n the present study. P r i n c i p a l Research Quest ion Which of the three models e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model best p r e d i c t s an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l in a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program? Secondary Research Quest ion Which form of mathematical combination ( a d d i t i v e versus m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of the combined expr e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model i s a be t t e r p r e d i c t o r of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program? The conti n u i n g education program considered i n the present study was Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981. This program i s an annual week long p r o f e s s i o n a l development program conducted by the adult education s e c t i o n of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Center for Continuing Education (UBC/CCE) for adult educators. The target population for t h i s program co n s i s t e d of approximately 10,000 p r o f e s s i o n a l adult educators i n Canada and the United States of America. Brochures and f l y e r s had been mailed to these p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s and those who pre-r e g i s t e r e d were the e n r o l l e e s used i n t h i s study. A sample drawn from those who d i d not p r e - r e g i s t e r made up the group of non-enrollees. The Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c was s e l e c t e d as 18 the context for t h i s study because ( i ) the organizers were w i l l i n g to cooperate and (2 ) the population of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s was appropriate for obt a i n i n g data for the examination of the r e l a t i v e impact of the v a r i a b l e s considered. Organization of the D i s s e r t a t i o n The remainder of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n c o n s i s t s of s i x chapters. Chapter II i s a review of p e r t i n e n t adult education l i t e r a t u r e on enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Chapter I I I i s a d i s c u s s i o n of the l i t e r a t u r e on p s y c h o l o g i c a l approaches to motivation and the choice of the conceptual framework that was adapted for t h i s study. In Chapter IV, the procedures employed to develop the instrument used i n the study are presented. Chapter V describes the design of the study. In Chapter VI, the r e s u l t s of the study are presented and discussed. Chapter V I I , the f i n a l one, includes a summary of the f i n d i n g s , a statement of the co n c l u s i o n s , and comments about the l i m i t a t i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s of the f i n d i n g s . 19 CHAPTER II ENROLLMENT DECISION MAKING: REVIEW OF ADULT EDUCATION LITERATURE The phenomenon of ad u l t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n educational programs to achieve t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s has been considerably researched over the years. In t h i s regard, s t u d i e s undertaken, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the course of the l a s t three decades, have g e n e r a l l y been done under the r u b r i c of p a r t i c i p a t i o n research. P a r t i c i p a t i o n researchers have l a r g e l y focused t h e i r a t t e n t i o n on determining the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the adult p a r t i c i p a n t , reasons why ad u l t s take part i n educational programs and why some p a r t i c i p a n t s p e r s i s t while others drop out from such programs. In the p r a c t i s e of contin u i n g education however, while the f i n d i n g s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n researchers have been of considerable usefulness, program providers s t i l l do not have a sound way of p r e d i c t i n g who w i l l e n r o l l i n t h e i r programs. The present study, t h e r e f o r e , focused on the process of enrollment d e c i s i o n making. The o r g a n i z a t i o n of t h i s chapter i s as f o l l o w s : f i r s t , the inadequacy of the conceptual premise of p a r t i c i p a t i o n research i s examined. Then, p a r t i c i p a t i o n research s t u d i e s with-, a d i r e c t bearing on enrollment d e c i s i o n making are reviewed. F i n a l l y , the conclusions which can be drawn from t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review are presented. 20 The I inadequacy of the Conceptual  Premise of P a r t i c i p a t i o n Research At l e a s t since 1816 adult educators have attempted to understand the process a d u l t s go through in deciding whether or not to e n r o l l i n s p e c i f i c e ducational programs. Underscoring the problem, Pole (1816) noted that while: . . . c h i l d r e n are sent (to school) under the a u t h o r i t y of parents; they are themselves not convinced of the advantages they are subsequently to derive from what they then regard as a task, and have too seldom any ideas a ssociated with what they are taught. The contrary i s the case with those in advanced l i f e : they attend the schools from t h e i r own d e s i r e to l e a r n ; they understand the value of the work i n which they engage; they keep i t s end i n view, and therefore assiduously apply the means for i t s attainment. (1816, p. 17) The heart of the problem, as i s evident from Pole's observation, i s that an adult u s u a l l y has the choice to decide whether or not to e n r o l l in an educational experience. When he decides to e n r o l l i n a s p e c i f i c educational program, i t i s u s u a l l y for the attainment of some o b j e c t i v e s (Havighurst, 1964; M i l l e r , 1967; Mezirow et a l . 1975; Morstain and Smart, 1977; Cross, 1981). This fact h i g h l i g h t s the c o m p l e x i t i e s of the phenomenon, because i t i s w e l l documented in the l i t e r a t u r e that almost every p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t has' more than one reason for engaging i n a s i n g l e l e a r n i n g experience (Houle, 1961; Johnstone and R i v e r a , 1965; Cross, 1981). In t h i s regard, Cross (1981) noted the "inappropriateness of t r y i n g to f i n d a s i n g l e reason for adult l e a r n i n g " (p. 84). Researchers who have been working i n the area of 21 p a r t i c i p a t i o n have mostly conceptualized the complex phenomemon of a d u l t s d e c i d i n g whether or not to e n r o l l in a s p e c i f i c educational program (enrollment d e c i s i o n making), and for those who e n r o l l , whether or not to take part i n the program ( i . e . engage i n a s p e c i f i c l e a r n i n g process) and whether those who decide to take part w i l l continue to do so ( p e r s i s t ) or drop out i n t o studies of p a r t i c i p a n t s or n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s (Boshier, 1973; Burgess, 1977). Other researchers have employed the construct of l e a r n i n g and c l a s s i f i e d a d u l t s as l e a r n e r s and would-be le a r n e r s (Carp, et a l . 1974; Morstain and Smart, 1977) or l e a r n e r s , would-be le a r n e r s and non-learners (Waniewicz,1976). The tendency to c l a s s i f y a d u l t s i n t o p a r t i c i p a n t s and non-p a r t i c i p a n t s with regard to t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior in educational programs i s to reduce a complex phenomenon i n t o a simple dichotomy which does not f a c i l i t a t e rigorous e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n . While there i s need to have information on what d i s t i n g u i s h e s p a r t i c i p a n t s from n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s , because of the broad conceptual base on which such studies are premised, other e q u a l l y important and conceptually d i s c r e t e processes that come under the g l o b a l construct of p a r t i c i p a t i o n are obscured. Consequently, despite the fact that s t u d i e s reported i n the p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e are conceptualized from the perspective of p a r t i c i p a n t s and n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s , the authors discuss simultaneously and i n a mixed fashion such d i s t i n c t processes as: p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who subsequently e n r o l l ( e n r o l l e e s ) and those who do not (non-enrollees); those who e n r o l l and take part i n a s p e c i f i c l e a r n i n g experience ( p a r t i c i p a n t s i n that 22 s p e c i f i c aspect of study) and those who do not (non-participant in that s p e c i f i c aspect of study); those who continue to take part i n some or a l l aspect of a program ( p e r s i s t e r s ) and those who d i s c o n t i n u e t h e i r involvement i n some or a l l aspects of a s p e c i f i c program (dropouts). S i m i l a r l y , c l a s s i f y i n g the adult population i n t o l e a r n e r s , would-be le a r n e r s and non-learners (Carp, et a l . 1974; Morstain and Smart, 1977; Waniewicz, 1976), while d i s c u s s i n g the phenomenon of a d u l t s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n educational programs, i s not an adequate conceptual system for rigorous e m p i r i c a l research. The concept of l e a r n i n g addresses the question of how an i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r a c t s with program content m a t e r i a l i n order to gain mastery; t h i s i s of course not even to mention other components of the concept of l e a r n i n g such as the a b i l i t y to l e a r n and one's own perception of h i s a b i l i t y to l e a r n . Consequently, to employ such a concept as l e a r n i n g and then to e x t r a p o l a t e the f i n d i n g s to d i s c u s s the g l o b a l construct of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s misleading. Thus, because researchers have examined the phenomenon of the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of a d u l t s i n c o n t i n u i n g education programs by c o n c e p t u a l i s i n g t h e i r studies using e i t h e r the g l o b a l construct of p a r t i c i p a t i o n or the narrow concept of l e a r n i n g to d i s c u s s the l a r g e r construct of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , such studi e s were considered not to be of d i r e c t usefulness in the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of t h i s study. Because the present study d e a l t s p e c i f i c a l l y with the process a d u l t s engage in when 23 dec i d i n g whether or not to e n r o l l in a s p e c i f i c program, p a r t i c i p a t i n g or l e a r n i n g was not of d i r e c t i n t e r e s t . The studie s p e r t a i n i n g to the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of a d u l t s i n contin u i n g education have been w e l l reviewed elsewhere (Marcus, 1976; Aslanian and B r i c k e l l , 1980; Cross, 1981). Consequently, they w i l l be examined here only i n s o f a r as t h e i r f i n d i n g s have some bearing on the c e n t r a l concern of t h i s study, namely the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l adult p a r t i c i p a n t s . Part i c i pat ion Research Bearing on  Enrollment Dec i sion Making Despite the plethora of e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s on d i f f e r e n t aspects of adu l t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n contin u i n g education, studies of enrollment d e c i s i o n making as a separate process p r i o r to a c t u a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n are conspicuously l a c k i n g . Although nearly every author who wr i t e s on the subject of p a r t i c i p a t i o n at some point concedes that the c e n t r a l issue i s that of d e c i s i o n making, adu l t education researchers have mostly tended to note the seeming non-existence of a s a t i s f a c t o r y conceptual framework for i n v e s t i g a t i n g the phenomenon (Knox and Videbeck, 1963; M i l l e r 1967; Mezirow, 1971; Boshier, 1978; Cross, 1981). In t h i s regard f o r example, Gordon G. Darkenwald, an Imogene Okes 24 Award winning author* 1, used the occasion of the 1980 Conference of the Commission of Prof e s s o r s of Adult Education at St. Louis to present a l i s t of "suggestions for advancing research and the theory on p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education" i n which he noted, i n t e r a l i a , t h a t : Despite the importance of s o c i a l and other contextual v a r i a b l e s , part i c i pat ion i s u l t imately a funct ion of  i n d i v i d u a l dec ision-making. Thus various dec i s i o n - making models need to be i d e n t i f i e d and t e s t e d i f we  are to advance fundamental knowledge of part i c i pat ion  behavior" [Emphasis added] (Darkenwald, 1980) The preceding i s a s u c c i n c t restatement of the nature of the fundamental problem which has been recognized since the turn of the l a s t century. The search for an explanatory conceptual framework to guide research in t h i s area has continued to be a subject of i n t e r e s t to scholars i n c o n t i n u i n g education. Progress at e f f o r t s to e x p l a i n the phenomenon has been impeded, t h i s author b e l i e v e s , not only by a lack of an adequate t h e o r e t i c a l system to guide i n v e s t i g a t i o n , but a l s o more fundamentally by a lack of conceptual c l a r i t y as to the problem. Knox and Videbeck (1963) proposed that p a r t i c i p a t i o n be viewed "as the r e s u l t of the i n t e r a c t i o n between an i n d i v i d u a l 1 *The Imogene Okes Award i s a y e a r l y r e c o g n i t i o n by the Commission on Research of the Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n i n North America of the adult education s c h o l a r ( s ) whose piece of research has made the most outstanding c o n t r i b u t i o n to the d i s c i p l i n e i n the continent. 25 and h i s environment", which i s a s i g n i f i c a n t conceptual c o n t r i b u t i o n to the a d u l t education l i t e r a t u r e . They h i g h l i g h t e d the need for researchers to consider the r e l a t i v e impact of i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s a c t i n g separately and i n concert on an adult l e a r n e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t o r y r o l e w i t h i n the context of an educational experience. They f u r t h e r emphasized that the p s y c h o l o g i c a l : . . . o r i e n t a t i o n s of an i n d i v i d u a l toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n c o n s i s t of s u b j e c t i v e t r a i t s that r e f l e c t need d i s p o s i t i o n s , c o g n i t i v e s t y l e , perceptions of o p p o r t u n i t i e s for p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and r e l a t i v e value placed by the i n d i v i d u a l on various elements in h i s network of s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . At a given point i n time, s u b j e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n s toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n operate w i t h i n the o b j e c t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n of b e h a v i o r a l s e t t i n g s contained w i t h i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s l i f e space c o n s i s t i n g of both the unique c o n f i g u r a t i o n of r o l e s and statuses that provide v e h i c l e s for s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n , and the a v a i l a b l e community resources and f a c i l i t i e s r e l a t i v e to p a r t i c i p a t i o n . (Knox and Videbeck, 1963, p. 105) A number of elements i n the Knox and Videbeck c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n are noteworthy for the purpose of the present d i s c u s s i o n . The readiness with which an i n d i v i d u a l opts for engagement i n an educational experience i s r e l a t e d to the i n d i v i d u a l ' s "need d i s p o s i t i o n " . What he does to bring about the r e a l i z a t i o n of those needs i s i n f l u e n c e d by elements in h i s network of s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s and the value he places on such f o r c e s . A p o t e n t i a l adult p a r t i c i p a n t might consider the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of e n r o l l i n g i n an educational program as a r e s u l t of h i s d e s i r e to achieve o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t e d to the pressures a r i s i n g out of h i s environment. The route he e v e n t u a l l y chooses may be i n f l u e n c e d to some extent by h i s s i g n i f i c a n t others. Although Knox and Videbeck d i d not s t a t e that they were 26 operating w i t h i n a Lewinian conceptual schema, they were using such Lewinian concepts as . " l i f e space" and behavior being a r e s u l t of the " i n t e r a c t i o n " between a person and h i s environment, thus, i m p l i c i t l y suggesting the relevance of Lewin's (1938) m u l t i p l i c a t i v e model of behavior being a f u n c t i o n of the i n t e r a c t i o n between a person and h i s environment. This Lewinian schema as i t r e l a t e s to Vroom's (1964) expectancy-valence theory i s examined f u r t h e r i n Chapter I I I where the d i s c u s s i o n of the p e r t i n e n t l i t e r a t u r e r e l a t e d to the conceptual framework of t h i s study i s taken up. M i l l e r (1967) made another s i g n i f i c a n t conceptual c o n t r i b u t i o n to the l i t e r a t u r e with h i s study P a r t i c i p a t i o n of  Adults in Educat ion: A Force F i e l d A n a l y s i s in which he sought to represent various c o n f i g u r a t i o n s of forces which determine people's l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c o n t i n u i n g education. While noting the a t h e o r e t i c a l nature of the previous s t u d i e s , he h i g h l i g h t e d the need for "a .guiding framework that would suggest in advance what phenomena we should be looking f o r " (p. 1). In t h i s regard he emphasized the need to focus on the two tasks of "making te n t a t ive p r e d i c t i o n s about future trends i n  p a r t i c i p a t i o n , . . . a n d developing plans for i n c r e a s i n g  part i c i pat ion i n desi rable educat i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s " ( M i l l e r , 1967, p. 2). M i l l e r undertook h i s study, adopting "Lewin's f o r c e - f i e l d a n a l y s i s as...the main s t r u c t u r a l device" (p.2) to increase the powers of adult educators to deal with the two tasks he i d e n t i f i e d . Within the Lewinian conceptual framework, M i l l e r developed h i s diagramatic p o s i t i v e - n e g a t i v e press model 27 d e p i c t i n g p a r t i c i p a t i v e behavior as a r e s u l t a n t of the i n t e r a c t i o n between personal needs and s o c i a l forces and the extent to which they are mutually supportive regarding the d e c i s i o n to engage i n continuing education. M i l l e r ' s a n a l y s i s was s i g n i f i c a n t not only because he drew a t t e n t i o n to the need for a h o l i s t i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the reasons that predispose an i n d i v i d u a l toward deciding to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a c o n t i n u i n g education program, but a l s o because he attempted to determine the r e l a t i v e i n f l u e n c e of i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l v a r i a b l e s . In t h i s connection he attempted to demonstrate that an increase i n forces pressing toward, or a decrease i n forces r e s i s t i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n , would infl u e n c e the l e v e l of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an educational program. M i l l e r ' s f o r c e - f i e l d a n a l y s i s , while an important conceptual c o n t r i b u t i o n , has apparently not as yet given impetus to much e m p i r i c a l research p o s s i b l y because he d i d not o p e r a t i o n a l i z e h i s v a r i a b l e s or suggest how i t could be done. The next major c o n t r i b u t i o n to the l i t e r a t u r e that attempted to conceptualize the phenomenon of enrollment d e c i s i o n making was made by Rubenson (1976) who proposed what he c a l l e d an expectancy-valence paradigm for i n v e s t i g a t i n g the question of recruitment i n adult education. S y m b o l i c a l l y , Rubenson presented h i s model as: K= f [ E ( V i x F i ) ] where K= force conducive to an a c t i o n ; Vi= valence for the expected consequences of the a c t i o n ; 28 Fi= expectation that the a c t i o n w i l l have the expected consequences. (1976, p. 50) Rubenson's model was an attempt to apply a modified v e r s i o n of Vroom's (1964) o r i g i n a l p r esentation of expectancy theory to adult education. Discussing the purpose of h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n , Rubenson (1976) cautioned t h a t : The purpose of the paradigm i s not to produce a mathematical d e s c r i p t i o n of recruitment i n adult education but to give a general i n d i c a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n between d i f f e r e n t v a r i a b l e s . In t h i s way the paradigm can c o n s t i t u t e a plan of future research and serve as a basis f or the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and c o l l a t i o n of previous research. (p. 50) Rubenson's presentation has been of considerable conceptual a i d to the present study p a r t i c u l a r l y for having made the linkage between the c e n t r a l t o p i c of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , namely enrollment d e c i s i o n making, and a t h e o r e t i c a l system that addresses the issue of choice behavior, namely Vroom's (1964) expectancy-valence models, the components of which have been the subjects of considerable e m p i r i c a l research. In the chapter "Toward a Model of Adult M o t i v a t i o n for Learning" i n her book Adults as Learners, Cross (1981) made a conceptual presentation which she c a l l e d the Chain-of-Response (COR) Model. She str e s s e d the need to take cognizance of the dynamic context i n which the d e c i s i o n to engage i n l e a r n i n g takes place and how that d e c i s i o n i s in f l u e n c e d by the e x i s t e n t i a l s i t u a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l . Cross a l s o stated that " p a r t i c i p a t i o n . . . i s not a s i n g l e a c t " , which would lead one to assume that a d i s t i n c t d e c i s i o n making process would be required 29 for each a c t . The notion of p a r t i c i p a t i o n as the product of a s e r i e s of composite a c t i v i t i e s underscores the point that p a r t i c i p a t i o n as a construct requires r e d e f i n i t i o n because i t s present umbrella usage fogs up the l i t e r a t u r e and thus hampers invest i g a t i o n . Expounding her model f u r t h e r , Cross made the point t h a t : A t t i t u d e s toward education [which i s the second v a r i a b l e i n her model] a r i s e d i r e c t l y from the l e a r n e r ' s own past experience and i n d i r e c t l y from the a t t i t u d e s and experiences of f r i e n d s and " s i g n i f i c a n t others". (1981, p. 125) Although Cross notes that her presentation " i s s t i l l f ar from the kind of theory that can be used to p r e d i c t who w i l l p a r t i c i p a t e in which adult l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s " (1981, p.126), the impression i s given that p r e d i c t i o n i s her u l t i m a t e goal. If that impression i s c o r r e c t , one would wonder why i n presenting her second v a r i a b l e , " a t t i t u d e s about education", she should begin with a d i s c u s s i o n of the " l e a r n e r s " , namely i n d i v i d u a l s already p a r t i c i p a t i n g . The p r e l i m i n a r y d i s c u s s i o n one would have expected however would have been that r e l a t i n g to the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s whose a t t i t u d e s toward education would p a r t l y f a c i l i t a t e the p r e d i c t i o n of the r e s u l t of t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. M i l l e r (1967) has suggested that the unstable work and family l i f e of people of lower socioeconomic groups has a negative i n f l u e n c e on t h e i r perception of education as a means of achieving t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . According to M i l l e r , the values of people i n the lower socioeconomic c l a s s encourage ...an a c t i o n - and e x c i t e m e n t - o r i e n t a t i o n , a b e l i e f i n 30 luck and f a t e , and an absorption i n the immediate present. To a l l of these values, education i s i n i m i c a l because i t requires a strong enough b e l i e f i n a future payoff to give up present g r a t i f i c a t i o n s , (p.9) Houle (1972), i n d i s c u s s i n g the " d e c i s i o n p o i n t s and components of an adult educational framework" i n the "fundamental system" of program planning which he proposed, noted i n the f i f t h component "the format i s f i t t e d i n t o l a r g e r patterns of l i f e " t h a t , "the l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s of men and women must o r d i n a r i l y be introduced with some care i n t o a complex m i l i e u which includes work, home, c i v i c and other r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " (p. 53). He f u r t h e r i n d i c a t e d t h a t : Since p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education u s u a l l y depends h e a v i l y on voluntary choice by the l e a r n e r s , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n plays an important part in most s i t u a t i o n s . A man needs to make i t c l e a r to h i s wife and family why he wants to be away from home one evening a week.... C o l l a b o r a t i v e arrangements among a s s o c i a t i o n s or or g a n i z a t i o n s need to be explained to t h e i r memberships or c o n s t i t u e n c i e s . Sometimes proper i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i s c r u c i a l to the success of l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t i e s ; sometimes i t i s merely f a c i l i t a t i v e or tension reducing.... (p.54) S i m i l a r l y , Cross (1981) noted that: A t t i t u d e s about education a l s o a r i s e i n d i r e c t l y through the a t t i t u d e s of reference groups and membership groups. The widespread f a i l u r e of members of the United Auto Workers to use educational b e n e f i t s , for example, i s frequently a t t r i b u t e d to i n d i f f e r e n t or negative a t t i t u d e s toward adult education on the part of f e l l o w workers. (p 126) Taken together t h e r e f o r e , i t would appear that the degree to which a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t i s l i k e l y to make a p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n w i l l be infl u e n c e d by the extent to which he perceives h i s f a m i l y , f r i e n d s and employer to be favorably 31 predisposed to h i s p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n a given program. Knox (1977) suggested that "one a t t i t u d i n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c that i s a s s o c i a t e d with higher p a r t i c i p a t i o n rates than a n t i c i p a t e d i s a sense of educational e f f i c a c y " (p. 186). Educational e f f i c a c y r e f e r s to the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l perceives the u t i l i t y of education i n a g l o b a l sense as a means of gaining mastery over h i s environment. This concept apparently has not been e m p i r i c a l l y i n v e s t i g a t e d . However, i t seems reasonable to assume that i n order for a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t to consider e n r o l l i n g i n an educational program, he must b e l i e v e that education has p r a c t i c a l consequences and u t i l i t y . In a d d i t i o n , the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t must perceive himself capable of executing the program content to f a c i l i t a t e the r e a l i z a t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e s he expects to achieve as a r e s u l t of p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the program. Bandura (1977a) made a conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n between an outcome expectancy and an e f f i c a c y e xpectation. He defined an outcome expectancy " as a person's estimate that a given behavior w i l l lead to c e r t a i n outcomes" and e f f i c a c y expectation as "the c o n v i c t i o n that one can s u c c e s s f u l l y execute the behavior required to produce the outcomes" (p 193). Bandura further,argued t h a t : Outcome and e f f i c a c y expectations are d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , because i n d i v i d u a l s can .believe that a p a r t i c u l a r course of a c t i o n w i l l produce c e r t a i n outcomes, but i f they e n t e r t a i n serious doubts about whether they can perform the necessary a c t i v i t i e s such information does not i n f l u e n c e t h e i r behavior. (p.193) 32 Hence he concluded that "perceived s e l f - e f f i c a c y i n f l u e n c e s choice of behavioral s e t t i n g s " (p.193). In t h i s regard, McClusky and Jensen (1959), Kidd (1973), and Knox (1977) have a l s o suggested that a d u l t s , contemplating whether or not to engage i n c o n t i n u i n g education, tend to be q u i t e concerned with t h e i r a b i l i t y to perform. As f u r t h e r noted by Bandura (1977a), Expectations of personal e f f i c a c y do not operate as d i s p o s i t i o n a l determinants independently of contextual f a c t o r s . Some s i t u a t i o n s r e q u i r e greater s k i l l and more arduous performances and c a r r y higher r i s k of negative consequences than do others. Expectations w i l l vary a c c o r d i n g l y . Thus, fo r example, the l e v e l and strength of perceived s e l f - e f f i c a c y i n p u b l i c speaking w i l l d i f f e r depending on the subject matter, the format of the p r e s e n t a t i o n , and the types of audiences that w i l l be addressed. The s o c i a l l e a r n i n g approach i s therefore based on a m i c r o a n a l y s i s of perceived p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s or motives of e f f e c t a n c e . (p 203) Consequently, the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of e f f i c a c y expectation would be considerably enhanced i f i t i s assessed i n terms of a s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t y ( f o r example, deciding whether or not to e n r o l l i n a s p e c i f i c educational program). M i l l e r (1967) i n h i s c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of h i s p o s i t i v e negative force model, noted that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n educational a c t i v i t i e s "represents a person's commitment of time and energy in competition with h i s d e s i r e to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a number of other a c t i v i t i e s " (p.3), for example, such as spending time with ones' f a m i l y , f r i e n d s or employment s i t u a t i o n . Consequently, for a p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e to decide to e n r o l l i n an educational program, the scheduled time of the program must be such that he 33 should f i n d i t s u i t a b l e r e l a t i v e to h i s other commitments. In t h i s regard, Clarke (1971), attempted to f i n d out the reasons why previous p a r t i c i p a n t s i n educational programs conducted by the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Centre for Continuing Education, d i d not r e - e n r o l l in subsequent programs. To undertake h i s study, Clarke drew a sample of 100 subjects from a population of 900 p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s that had p r e v i o u s l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n one or more programs o f f e r e d by the i n s t i t u t i o n . He found that of the 244 reasons given for not re-e n r o l l i n g , 107 (43.9%) were r e l a t e d to time c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . Clarke reported t h a t : lack of time because of business commitments i s e v i d e n t l y the most important s i n g l e f a c t o r operating to keep those i n the sample from once again atten d i n g , followed by lack of time because of family commitments, involvement i n courses elsewhere, lack of time because of other clubs or groups, the i n a b i l i t y to schedule time on a regular b a s i s . (p.56) Clarke's (1971) f i n d i n g that 43.9% of the reasons given by the subjects of h i s study for not r e - e n r o l l i n g were time r e l a t e d i s s i m i l a r to reports of other s t u d i e s . Carp, et a l . (1974) reported that when they asked t h e i r 3001 sample of would-be lear n e r s to s e l e c t from a l i s t of twenty-four reasons those that they f e l t were important in keeping them from " l e a r n i n g what they want t o . l e a r n " , 46% of the respondents i n d i c a t e d "not enough time" as t h e i r second most important " p o t e n t i a l o b s t a c l e " (pp.45-47). S i m i l a r l y , Waniewicz (1976) reported that out of h i s sample of 817 would-be l e a r n e r s , 37% i n d i c a t e d "too busy" as t h e i r major obstacle to l e a r n i n g (p.122). Thus, i t would appear that the s u i t a b i l i t y of time could be an important i n f l u e n c e i n 34 the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s . However, i t i s important to note that none of the authors ( C l a r k e , 1971; Carp, et a l . 1974 and Waniewicz, 1976) - reported how they assured the v a l i d i t y of t h e i r s ubjects' responses with regard to "lack of time" as a reason for t h e i r f a i l u r e to e n r o l l i n an educational program. This issue of the v a l i d i t y of the data regarding lack of time i s r a i s e d because i t has been suggested that p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s tend to use the excuse of lack of time as a face saving device ( G r i f f i t h , 1982). Summary From the preceeding d i s c u s s i o n , the f o l l o w i n g benchmarks were e s t a b l i s h e d as b u i l d i n g blocks i n the present study: i ) Adults decide to e n r o l l i n a s p e c i f i c educational program to achieve a v a r i e t y of o b j e c t i v e s ; i i ) S p e c i f i c measurement instruments could not be found for the v a r i a b l e s s e l e c t e d from the p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e which were considered p e r t i n e n t to t h i s study; i i i ) The d e c i s i o n making frameworks found i n adult education l i t e r a t u r e are mainly conceptual presentations without the necessary accompanying mechanics for t h e i r o p e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n . Consequently, i t was considered necessary to i d e n t i f y a conceptual system from the l i t e r a t u r e of other d i s c i p l i n e s that had the c a p a b i l i t i e s of e x p l a i n i n g how the v a r i a b l e s of t h i s 35 study r e l a t e t o each o t h e r , such as t o f a c i l i t a t e the p r e d i c t i o n of e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s . T h i s t a s k i s taken up i n the next c h a p t e r . 36 CHAPTER I I I PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO MOTIVATION:  THE FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS A review of the adult education p a r t i c i p a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e showed m u l t i p l e reasons why a given i n d i v i d u a l might decide to e n r o l l in a s p e c i f i c program . Consequently, i n c o n c e p t u a l i s i n g the issue of enrollment d e c i s i o n making, the problem was that of determining the personal and environmental f a c t o r s which infl u e n c e d the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of an i n d i v i d u a l as he considered the o b j e c t i v e s he d e s i r e d to achieve. In l i g h t of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l nature of the problem, i t was considered important to anchor the present i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n a p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r e t i c a l scheme. In the present chapter, three p s y c h o l o g i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n s to motivation are reviewed. This i s then followed by presentation of Vroom's valence and force p r o p o s i t i o n s , m o d i f i c a t i o n s to these valence and force p r o p o s i t i o n s and adaptation of the modified valence and force p r o p o s i t i o n s . The hypotheses for the study are then given, followed by a summary. A Review of Three Psycholog i c a l Or i e n t a t ions To Mo t i v a t i o n A review of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e revealed several major c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s of the t h e o r e t i c a l approaches to moti v a t i o n . In h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , Vroom (1964) d i s t i n g u i s h e d three o r i e n t a t i o n s , namely: e a r l y t h e o r i e s based on the p r i n c i p l e of hedonism; d r i v e and reinforcement t h e o r i e s , and 37 c o g n i t i v e t h e o r i e s . The P r i n c i p l e of Hedonism The o r i g i n s of most contemporary t h e o r i e s of motivation can be traced to some extent to the p r i n c i p l e of hedonism--the d o c t r i n e that voluntary behavior i s guided by the pu r s u i t of pleasure and the avoidance of pain. According to Vroom (1964), the adherence to t h i s p r i n c i p l e , a l b e i t w i t h i n an e m p i r i c a l t h e o r e t i c a l system designed to e x p l a i n human behavior, i s s t i l l evident today. Steers and Porter (1979), have a l s o i n d i c a t e d that "Hedonism assumes a c e r t a i n degree of conscious behavior on the part of i n d i v i d u a l s whereby they make i n t e n t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s or choices concerning future a c t i o n " (p. 9). Thus, t h e o r e t i c a l l y an i n d i v i d u a l would be expected to decide on a r a t i o n a l b a s i s to opt for a course of a c t i o n that he be l i e v e s w i l l maximize h i s chances of a t t a i n i n g h i s d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . According to Vroom (1964), by the clo s e of the nineteenth century, "the p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r i n c i p l e of hedonism, despite i t s s i m p l i c i t y and widespread a p p e a l p r e s e n t e d many problems for those who saw i n i t the foundation f or a theory of behavior" (p.10). As Vroom (1964) f u r t h e r noted, "the he d o n i s t i c assumption had no e m p i r i c a l content and was untestable (given that) any form of behavior could be explained, a f t e r the f a c t , by p o s t u l a t i n g p a r t i c u l a r sources of pleasure or pa i n , but no form of behavior could be p r e d i c t e d i n advance" (p. 10). E f f o r t s to bridge the gap between p h i l o s o p h i c a l t h e o r i z i n g and t e s t a b l e p s y c h o l o g i c a l theory r e s u l t e d i n the emergence of d r i v e 38 and reinforcement t h e o r i e s , each attempting to demonstrate e m p i r i c a l l y v e r i f i a b l e r e l a t i o n s h i p s among sets of v a r i a b l e s which could be used to p r e d i c t and e x p l a i n behavior. Drive and Reinforcement Theories Drive t h e o r i e s are grounded in biology and physics and draw on a p h y s i o l o g i c a l research t r a d i t i o n (Atkinson,1964; Rubenson, 1976). Thorndike (1932) and H u l l (1943) were among the e a r l y proponents of t h i s research t r a d i t i o n . They employed such c o n s t r u c t s as i n s t i n c t s , d r i v e s , habit and i n c e n t i v e s to e x p l a i n the o r i g i n , c o n t r o l and per s i s t e n c e of behavior which they described in stimulus-response chains. The stimulus-response conceptual system assumes that an i n d i v i d u a l r eacts best i f he has been conditioned to respond according to a preprogrammed response patt e r n i r r e s p e c t i v e of a v a i l a b l e b e havioral a l t e r n a t i v e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , future a c t i o n s of an i n d i v i d u a l are p r e d i c t a b l e . This o r i e n t a t i o n ignores the fa c t that i n d i v i d u a l s i n t h e i r d a i l y l i v e s are normally under a complex set of pressures and f i n d themselves having to make choices to maximize t h e i r chances of a t t a i n i n g t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . Given the dynamic nature of the i n t e r a c t i o n between a person and h i s environment, i t i s not p o s s i b l e to e s t a b l i s h a pr i o r i stimulus-response chains for a l l conceivable choice s i t u a t i o n s f or any normal i n d i v i d u a l . An i n d i v i d u a l , confronted with the same or d i f f e r e n t problem s i t u a t i o n s at various times, w i l l react d i f f e r e n t l y , r e f l e c t i n g not only h i s unique p e r s o n a l i t y , but al s o the circumstances that o r i g i n a t e d the 39 problem s i t u a t i o n . The s t r a t e g i e s any i n d i v i d u a l chooses to employ to achieve h i s o b j e c t i v e s at any given time w i l l depend to a great extent on the importance of the issues at stake and the strength of the i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e s i r e to a t t a i n h i s object i v e s . Enrollment i n an adult educational program i s e s s e n t i a l l y a voluntary undertaking. An i n d i v i d u a l has a set of o b j e c t i v e s he wants to achieve. Based on the extent of the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a t t a i n i n g each of these o b j e c t i v e s and t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance in the context of h i s o v e r a l l dominant concerns, he decides on a f e a s i b l e method of r e a l i z i n g h i s o b j e c t i v e s . I t i s more than a stimulus-response connection. Consequently, d r i v e and reinforcement t h e o r i e s were considered inadequate to e x p l a i n how personal and environmental forces can i n f l u e n c e the choice of a course of a c t i o n from a range of p o s s i b i l i t i e s . In t h i s regard, c o g n i t i v e t h e o r i e s have examined how the i n t e r a c t i o n between personal f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e the course of a c t i o n which an i n d i v i d u a l chooses. Researchers working w i t h i n the c o g n i t i v i s t research t r a d i t i o n are beginning to focus t h e i r i n t e r e s t s on how the i n t e r a c t i o n of personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s might be b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r s of the course of a c t i o n an i n d i v i d u a l might choose as opposed to using only personal c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . C o g n i t i v e Theories P s y c h o l o g i s t s working w i t h i n the c o g n i t i v e school of thought, while accepting the e m p i r i c a l evidence underlying Thorndike's (1932) law of e f f e c t , contend that the stimulus-40 response-reinforcement t h e o r i e s do not adequately e x p l a i n the more complex aspects of choice behavior. The e a r l y Thorndike versi o n of the stimulus-response (S-R) a s s o c i a t i o n theory s t a t e d that the stimulus provides the impetus to choose among a l t e r n a t i v e s , and that which i s chosen i s a f u n c t i o n of the strength of the S-R connection developed as a r e s u l t of d i f f e r e n t i a l rewards in the past. Thus for example, the s a t i s f a c t i o n experienced as a r e s u l t of previous p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s p o s i t e d to be a strong i m p e l l i n g force to e n r o l l i n the future i n a continuing education program. In t h i s regard, the r o l e of h i s t o r y i s important. The c o g n i t i v i s t s hold that the b e l i e f s and expectations i n d i v i d u a l s have concerning future goal-objects are major determinants of human behavior. Behavior i s viewed as purposeful, goal d i r e c t e d , and based on conscious i n t e n t i o n s to a t t a i n p o s i t i v e l y valent goals and avoid n e g a t i v e l y valent goals. Tolman (1932) and Lewin (1938) are two of the e a r l i e s t proponents of the c o g n i t i v i s t school of thought. Both wanted to ex p l a i n the behavior of an organism from the perspect i v e of the i n t e r a c t i o n •of contemporaneous i n f l u e n c e s impinging upon the organism. This t h e o r e t i c a l o r i e n t a t i o n i s l a r g e l y a h i s t o r i c a l in c o n t r a s t to the h i s t o r i c a l nature of d r i v e theory. According to Atkinson (1964), Contemporary d e c i s i o n theory represents a formal statement of the kind of theory of motivation of performance that Tolman and Lewin had proposed, using d i f f e r e n t terms to designate, on the one hand, the strength of expectancy that an act w i l l lead on to some consequence and, on the other, the s u b j e c t i v e value of the consequence. (p 211) 41 One of the d e c i s i o n making t h e o r i e s that has developed from the c o g n i t i v i s t research t r a d i t i o n i s expectancy theory. According to Wanous (1972), Expectancy theory i s b a s i c a l l y a r a t i o n a l model of how i n d i v i d u a l s develop preferences and make choices. The theory s t a t e s how c o g n i t i v e ( i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y ) and a f f e c t i v e (valence) components of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s environment combine to y i e l d an index of o v e r a l l f e e l i n g about a referent object or course of a c t i o n , (p. 154) Vroom (1964) i s one of the schol a r s who has presented an expectancy based theory of mot i v a t i o n . Vroom's Valence and Force P r o p o s i t i o n s Vroom (1964) presented a c o g n i t i v e model premised on two p r o p o s i t i o n s which he po s i t e d as p r e d i c t i n g the valence of outcomes and the force toward behavior. Subsequent expectancy theory researchers have g e n e r a l l y designated Vroom's p r o p o s i t i o n s as models: namely a valence and a force model ( M i t c h e l l , 1974, p.1053). According to M i t c h e l l and Beach (1976), "an outcome i s simply anything an i n d i v i d u a l might want to a t t a i n " (p 234). Valence Model The valence model expresses a r e l a t i o n s h i p between valence and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y . Valence assumes that people have preferences for a l t e r n a t i v e s t a t e s of nature. I t r e f e r s to the strength of a person's d e s i r e f o r , or a t t r a c t i o n toward outcomes. An outcome i s s a i d to be: 42 . . . p o s i t i v e l y valent when the person p r e f e r s a t t a i n i n g i t to not a t t a i n i n g i t ( i . e . , he pr e f e r s x to not x ) . An outcome has a valence of zero when the person i s i n d i f f e r e n t to a t t a i n i n g or not a t t a i n i n g i t ( i . e . , he i s i n d i f f e r e n t to x or not x ) , and i t i s neg a t i v e l y valent when he p r e f e r s not a t t a i n i n g i t to a t t a i n i n g i t ( i . e . , he p r e f e r s not x to x ) . I t i s assumed that valence can take a wide range of both p o s i t i v e and negative values. (Vroom, 1964, p. 15) The strength of a person's d e s i r e or aversion for a l t e r n a t i v e outcomes i s based not on the i n t r i n s i c p r o p e r t i e s of the outcomes but on the a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n or d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n a s s o c i a t e d with the outcomes. According to Vroom (1964), i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y r e f e r s to a person's perception of an outcome leading to the attainment of other outcomes. I t i s an outcome-outcome r e l a t i o n s h i p (p. 18). For example, an i n d i v i d u a l may decide to e n r o l l i n a continuing education program because he a n t i c i p a t e s that p a r t i c i p a t i n g w i l l enable him to a t t a i n ends (e.g., c r e d i t s , s k i l l s , make new acquaintances) that w i l l f a c i l i t a t e h i s chances of securing a job; or enable him to enhance h i s chances of promotion on the job; or make new f r i e n d s that w i l l help him p r a c t i c a l l y or p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y to maintain mental or m a t e r i a l balance i n h i s d a i l y l i f e ; or help him improve r e l a t i o n s h i p s with h i s fami l y . In e f f e c t what i s being p o s i t e d i s t h a t : If an object i s be l i e v e d by a person to lead to d e s i r e d consequences or to prevent undesired consequences, the person i s pre d i c t e d to have a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e toward i t . I f , on the other hand, i t i s be l i e v e d by the person to lead to undesired consequences or to prevent d e s i r e d consequences, the person i s p r e d i c t e d to have a negative a t t i t u d e toward i t . (Vroom, 1964, p. 16) 43 The r e l a t i o n s h i p hypothesized by the valence model i s expressed i n the f o l l o w i n g p r o p o s i t i o n : "The valence of an outcome to a person i s a monotonically i n c r e a s i n g f u n c t i o n of the a l g e b r a i c sum of the products of the valences of a l l other outcomes and h i s conceptions of i t s i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y for the attainment of these other outcomes" (Vroom, 1964, p.17). In other words, a person might decide to e n r o l l i n a s p e c i f i c e ducational program because he b e l i e v e s that the o b j e c t i v e s he achieves consequent upon h i s engagement i n that l e a r n i n g experience w i l l f a c i l i t a t e h i s attainment of other d e s i r a b l e o b j e c t i v e s outside the immediate context of l e a r n i n g . S y m b o l i c a l l y , the p r o p o s i t i o n has been represented by M i t c h e l l (1974) for an i n d i v i d u a l as f o l l o w s : Vj = f E( V k l j k ) j * k where Vj= The valence of outcome j ; Ijk= The cognized i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of outcome j for the attainment of outcome k; Vk= The valence of outcome k; and n= The number of outcomes. (1974, p 1054) Force Model According to Vroom (1964), force i s the h y p o t h e t i c a l c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r that c o n t r o l s behavior. I t i s the product of valence and expectancy and consequently c o n t r o l s the r e s u l t a n t behavior. Valence has already been defined. 44 According to Vroom (1964), expectancy r e f e r s to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f that a given a c t i o n w i l l be followed by the attainment of a d e s i r e d outcome. Expectancies, he f u r t h e r p o s t u l a t e d , may be described i n terms of t h e i r s t rength. In t h i s regard, maximal strength i s i n d i c a t e d by s u b j e c t i v e c e r t a i n t y that the act (e.g. enrollment) w i l l be followed by the d e s i r e d outcome, (e.g., meet new f r i e n d s ) , while minimal or zero strength i s i n d i c a t e d by the s u b j e c t i v e c e r t a i n t y that the act w i l l not be followed by the d e s i r e d outcome. The strength of the force to act one way rather than another to achieve a d e s i r e d outcome i s po s i t e d by Vroom (1964) to be "a monotonically i n c r e a s i n g f u n c t i o n of the product of valences and expectancies" (p.18). This f u n c t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p i s expressed by the f o l l o w i n g p r o p o s i t i o n : "The force on a person to perform an act i s a monotonically i n c r e a s i n g f u n c t i o n of the a l g e b r a i c sum of the products of the valences of a l l outcomes and the strength of h i s expectancies that the act w i l l be followed by the attainment of these outcomes" (Vroom 1964, p. 18). S y m b o l i c a l l y , t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n has been expressed in the form of the f o l l o w i n g equation ( M i t c h e l l , 1974, p.1054). F i = .E (Ei j V j ) where F i The force on the i n d i v i d u a l to perform act i ; E i j The strength of the expectancy that act i w i l l be followed by outcome j ; Vj The valence of outcome j ; and n The number of outcomes. 45 Modif i c a t i o n s to the Valence and Force Models A number of conceptual and e m p i r i c a l m o d i f i c a t i o n s have been made to the force and valence models. The u t i l i t y of extending the models using relevant personal and environmental non-expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s to improve the p r e d i c t i v e power of the models has been attempted, the force and valence models have been combined, and a d i s t i n c t i o n has been made between valence and importance. The e m p i r i c a l issue of whether or not the components of the models should be m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y or a d d i t i v e l y combined has a l s o been r a i s e d . Extension of the Force and Valence Models I t has been argued that when expectancy theory i s used to p r e d i c t behavior, such behavior i s l i k e l y to be infl u e n c e d by environmental f a c t o r s with which the expectancy theory does not deal ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen 1973; Parker and Dyer 1976). M i t c h e l l and Knudsen (1973) used the f o l l o w i n g extended valence model to p r e d i c t 106 students' occupational choices: B=EIiVi+EXpMCp+EXfMCf where B Behavior (e.g occupational c h o i c e ) ; IV I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence; EXp The perceived expectations of peers; MCp The motivation to comply with the perceived expectations of one's peers; EXf The perceived expectations of one's fa m i l y ; MCf The motivation to comply with the perceived expectations of one's f a m i l y ; and 46 n = The number of outcomes. (pp. 43-44) S e p a r a t e l y , the terms EXpMCp (the perce ived expec ta t ions of peers m u l t i p l i e d by the m o t i v a t i o n to comply) and EXfMCf (the perce ived expec ta t ion of f ami ly m u l t i p l i e d by the m o t i v a t i o n to comply) c o r r e l a t e d 0 . 4 5 and 0 .43 r e s p e c t i v e l y w i t h o c c u p a t i o n a l cho ice ( p < .0O ( p . 4 6 ) . Parker and Dyer ( 1 9 7 6 ) , employing a combined force and valence model, used the perce ived o p i n i o n s of wi fe and immediate f ami ly and the i n f l u e n c e of those perce ived o p i n i o n s i n t h e i r study of the d e c i s i o n of Naval O f f i c e r s to r e t i r e from s e r v i c e . They repor ted that the w i f e / f a m i l y index c o r r e l a t e d 0 .47 w i t h re t i rement s t a t u s , whereas the c o r r e l a t i o n between the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s ( p r e d i c t o r score) and re t i rement s ta tus was 0 . 4 6 , which was s i g n i f i c a n t at the 0 .05 l e v e l (p. 1 0 9 ) . A c c o r d i n g l y , the w i f e / f a m i l y index entered the regre s s ion equat ion f i r s t , y i e l d i n g a R of .47 which increased to .57 when the p r e d i c t o r score r e a l i s e d from the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s en te red . Consequently , they suggested f u r t h e r research w i t h non-expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s to determine which v a r i a b l e s are a p p r o p r i a t e , and why these v a r i a b l e s are not accounted for by the bas ic expectancy formula , n o t i n g that " a good dea l of fu ture p r a c t i c a l u t i l i t y of expectancy theory may hinge on the r e s u l t s of t h i s r e sea rch" ( p . 1 1 5 ) . Combination of the Force and Valence Models M i t c h e l l (19 7 4 ; 1981) i n h i s reviews of the expectancy theory l i t e r a t u r e noted that whi l e Vroom's ( 1 9 6 4 ) o r i g i n a l valence model has remained e s s e n t i a l l y the same, a number of 47 m o d i f i c a t i o n s in the f o r c e model (as i t r e l a t e s to job e f f o r t ) have o c c u r r e d . C i t i n g the work of G a l b r a i t h and Cummings (1967), he noted that one of the m o d i f i c a t i o n s that has been made i s based on the d i s t i n c t i o n ( f i r s t made by Vroom 1964; then by Lawler and P o r t e r , 1967) between f i r s t - and second- l e v e l outcomes. A f i r s t l e v e l outcome i s one that has a valence which the i n v e s t i g a t o r i s i n t e r e s t e d in p r e d i c t i n g (e.g. performance on the job or i n a l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n ) , while the second l e v e l outcomes are events to which the f i r s t l e v e l outcomes are expected to l e a d (e.g. promotions on the j o b ) . He noted that while there are some d i f f e r e n c e s i n terms of the s p e c i f i c e v o l u t i o n of the m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n , i n general the equation fo r a combined f o r c e and valence model i s as f o l l o w s : n W = E ( l I i j V j ) J«l where W = E f f o r t ; E = The expectancy that e f f o r t leads to performance; I i j = The i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of performance for the attainment of second l e v e l outcomes; Vj = The valence of the second l e v e l outcomes; n = The number of outcomes. (1974, p. 1055) A c c o r d i n g l y , M i t c h e l l (1974) noted t h a t : Thus, the o r i g i n a l e f f o r t and valence models presented by Vroom were combined. Job e f f o r t was being p r e d i c t e d from the expectancy that a given l e v e l of e f f o r t l e d to a given l e v e l of performance weighted by 48 the valence of that performance l e v e l . The valence of t h i s performance l e v e l was then determined by examining the degree to which i t was instrumental for the attainment of second-level outcomes weighted i n turn by t h e i r valence. We have E (E IV) as opposed to E EV. (p 1055). D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g Valence and Importance Based on the r e s u l t s Parker and Dyer (1976) obtained from t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the retirement d e c i s i o n making of 702 Naval O f f i c e r s using a 25 outcomes model, the authors suggested that the concept of valence be conceptually modified by adding a separate measure of importance of outcomes. They reported that the accuracy of t h e i r model to p r e d i c t whether or not the o f f i c e r s r e t i r e d improved from 62.2% when they used a l l 25 outcomes to 68.3% when the eight outcomes ranked by the subjects as most important i n t h e i r retirement d e c i s i o n making were used. Hence they suggested that " i t would appear to be not only conceptually accurate, but a l s o methodologically u s e f u l , to make d i s t i n c t i o n s between outcome valence and outcome importance i n expectancy theory research" (Parker and Dyer, 1976, p. 112). Acco r d i n g l y , the authors proposed the f o l l o w i n g combination of the force and valence model for f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n : F i = 10 E i j E Impj x Vj x I j k j * k where F i The force on the i n d i v i d u a l to perform act i ; E i j The strength of the expectancy that act i w i l l be followed by outcome j ; 49 Impj= The importance of outcome j ; Vj = The valence of outcome j ; I j k = The cognized i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of outcome j for the attainment of outcome k; and n = The number of outcome. (p.112) E m p i r i c a l Issue One of the e m p i r i c a l issues that has engaged the a t t e n t i o n of expectancy theory researchers i s the question of whether i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and expectancy scores should be combined m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y or a d d i t i v e l y to p r e d i c t motivation ( M i t c h e l l , 1974; Wahba and House, 1974; M i t c h e l l , 1981). According to Wahba and House (1974), "some studie s have supported m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combinations ... none of the research has compared the two methods of combining the independent v a r i a b l e s to determine which i s the most p r e d i c t i v e of motivation " (p. 142). In t h i s regard, M i t c h e l l (1981) referenced h i s conclusion from h i s review of expectancy theory based studies ( M i t c h e l l , 1974) that have used e i t h e r of the two forms of combining the components of the force and valence models and noted "that the a d d i t i v e models often d i d as w e l l or better than the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ones " (1981; p. 17). I t would therefore seem that the question of which of the two forms, a d d i t i v e or m u l t i p l i c a t i v e , has greater p r e d i c t i v e accuracy when employed i n the same study has yet to be determined. To f a c i l i t a t e such a comparative a n a l y s i s , the a d d i t i v e v e r s i o n of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e form of the combined force and valence model (Parker and Dyer, 1976) can be p o s i t e d as f o l l o w s : 50 1 0 . . CH/ENROLL= E Ei3 + E Impj + E I j k + E Vj j * k Jr-where Ch/Enroll = Choice to e n r o l l ; E i j = The strength of the expectancy that act i w i l l be followed by outcome j ; Impj = The importance of outcome j ; Vj = The valence of outcome j ; I j k = The cognized i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of outcome j for the attainment of outcome k; n = The number of outcomes. Adaptat ion of the Modi f ied Force and Valence Models In developing the models for use in t h i s research, the author drew upon the suggestions of various w r i t e r s on expectancy theory and made h i s own m o d i f i c a t i o n s to the e x i s t i n g formulas as w e l l . Two major adaptations were the in c o r p o r a t i o n of the concept of importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) and the i n c l u s i o n of contextual v a r i a b l e s ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen, 1973; Parker and Dyer, 1976). Contextual v a r i a b l e s are commonly r e f e r r e d to i n the expectancy l i t e r a t u r e as "non-expectancy v a r i a b l e s " (Parker and Dyer, 1976, p. 109). In t h i s research, each expectancy v a r i a b l e in the adapted e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model took the form of the sum,taken across o b j e c t i v e s , of importance m u l t i p l i e d by expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by valence. Each expectancy v a r i a b l e i n the adapted instrumental-valence model a l s o took the 51 form of the sum, taken across o b j e c t i v e s , of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence. The present study attempted to d i s c r i m i n a t e e n r o l l e e s from non-enrollees as indexed by p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n with the p r o v i d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n . The modified force and valence models i n c o r p o r a t i n g the concept of importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) were f u r t h e r extended using s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen 1973; Parker and Dyer, 1976). The v a r i a b l e s used to extend the models were the r e s p e c t i v e products of each of the f o l l o w i n g s i x doublets: the perceived expectation of f r i e n d s and the motivation to comply (EXfrMCfr); the perceived expectation of family and the motivation to comply (EXfMCf); the perceived expectation of employer and the motivation to comply (EXeMCe); educational e f f i c a c y and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ( E E e l n f ) ; educational e f f i c a c y expectation and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (EEexpInf); and s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). These v a r i a b l e s were chosen because they had been reported in the m o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e to have s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of a d u l t s i n c o n t i n u i n g educat i o n . The force and valence models modified by importance and extended by s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s were adapted and designated as the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models r e s p e c t i v e l y i n t h i s study. With regard to the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model, the o b j e c t i v e s which are a t t a i n a b l e 52 w i t h i n the immediate context of l e a r n i n g were used (Havighurst 1964). S y m b o l i c a l l y , the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model can be s t a t e d in the form of the f o l l o w i n g equation: Ch/ENROLL= jPdmpjxEi jxVj )+EXf rMCf r+EXfMCf +EXeMCe+EEeInf +EEexpInf + STInf where Ch/Enroll = Choice to e n r o l l E i j = The strength of the expectancy that act i w i l l be followed by outcome j ; Impj = The importance of outcome j ; Vj = The valence of outcome j ; EXfrMCfr = Perceived expectations of f r i e n d s x motivation to comply; EXfMCf = Perceived expectations of family x motivation to comply; EXeMCe = Perceived expectations of employer x motivation to comply; EEelnf = Educational e f f i c a c y x i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; EEexpInf = Educational e f f i c a c y expectations x inf l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; STInf = Suitableness of scheduled time of program x inf l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; and n = The number of outcomes. The instrumental-valence model deals with o b j e c t i v e s which are a t t a i n a b l e outside the immediate context of l e a r n i n g 53 consequent upon having p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an educational program (Havighurst, 1964). S y m b o l i c a l l y , the instrumental-valence model can be stated in the form of the f o l l o w i n g equation: Ch/ENROLL= I_( Impjxl jkxVj )+EXf rMCf r+EXfMCf+EXeMCe+EEeInf+EEexpInf+ STInf j#k where Ch/En r o l l = Choice to e n r o l l Impj = The importance of outcome j ; I j k = the cognized i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of outcome j for the attainment of outcome k; Vj = The valence of outcome j ; EXfrMCfr = Perceived expectations of f r i e n d s x motivation to comply; EXfMCf = Perceived expectations of family x motivation to comply; EXeMCe = Perceived expectations of employer x motivation to comply; EEelnf = Educational e f f i c a c y x infl u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; EEexpInf - Educational e f f i c a c y expectations x inf l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; STInf = Suitableness of scheduled time of program x i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; and n = the number of outcomes. The d e c i s i o n to use expectancy theory i n the context of adult education research stems from the kind of questions researchers working with the theory are asking now. According 54 to M i t c h e l l (1981) the focus has s h i f t e d from "asking i f expectancy theory i s true or not" to that of determining "the c o n d i t i o n s or environments i n which an expectancy type a n a l y s i s i s l i k e l y to be h e l p f u l " (p. 22). M i t c h e l l f u r t h e r suggested that future expectancy theory based s t u d i e s w i l l have to take cognisance of the f o l l o w i n g boundary c o n d i t i o n s w i t h i n which the theory seems to work best: (1) the behavior i s under the c o n t r o l of the subject, (2) the rewards are in f a c t contingent upon s p e c i f i c behaviors, (3) the behavior-outcome l i n k s are unambiguous, and (4) there i s l i t t l e delay between the assessment of p r e d i c t o r s and observations of the c r i t e r i o n . These four c o n d i t i o n s are l a r g e l y met i n the enrollment d e c i s i o n making context of c o n t i n u i n g education. The d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l or not in an educational program i s normally considered to reside u l t i m a t e l y w i t h a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t . However, i f an i n d i v i d u a l i s employed i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n , i t i s l i k e l y that h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making would be influenced by h i s perception of h i s employer's a t t i t u d e regarding h i s (employee's) i n t e n t i o n to e n r o l l i n the program. Consequently, in t h i s study, one of the goals was to f i n d out the extent to which the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of employed subjects was i n f l u e n c e d by t h e i r perception of t h e i r employers' expectations regarding t h e i r p o s s i b l e enrollment i n the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Secondly, desired o b j e c t i v e s that involve a l e a r n i n g need (e.g., the need to acquire s p e c i f i c competencies, extend one's s o c i a l network or such i n t r i n s i c o b j e c t i v e s as l e a r n i n g for the 55 sake of l e a r n i n g ) are for the most part contingent upon enrollment f o r an i n d i v i d u a l who b e l i e v e s that p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n an educational program i s the best means to achieve h i s d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s at that time. T h i r d l y , i t i s u s u a l l y r e l a t i v e l y c l e a r to the p a r t i c i p a n t whether or not he i s achieving h i s d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e . In case of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n , the option i s normally open to him to continue or withdraw from that l e a r n i n g context. F i n a l l y , both the assessment of the p r e d i c t o r s and observation of the c r i t e r i o n (i.e.,whether or not a s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l e n r o l l e d ) can u s u a l l y be done w i t h i n the f i r s t week of r e g i s t r a t i o n . A summary of the models proposed for the present study i s presented i n Table 1 . t a b l e 1 Summary o f M o d e l s P r o p o s e d Mode 1 A u t h o r Form E x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model As p r o p o s e d i n t h i s s t u d y Ch/ENROLL= E ( I m p j xE i j x V j ) + E X f r M C f r + E X f M C f + EXeMCe+ E E e l n f + E E e x p I n f + S T I n f I n s t r u m e n t a l - v a l e n c e model As p r o p o s e d i n t h i s s t u d y Ch/ENROLL= E ( I m p j x i j k x V j ) + E X f r M C f r + E X f M C f + EXeMCe+ E E e l n f + E E e x p I n f + S T I n f j * k M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y c o m b i n e d e x p r e s s i v e -f o r c e a n d i n s t r u m e n t a l - v a l e n c e model As p r o p o s e d i n t h i s s t u d y Ch/ENROLL = E E ( I m p j x I j k x V j ) + E X f r M C f r + E X f M C f + EXeMCe+ E E e l n f + E E e x p I n f + S T I n f j # k A d d i t i v e l y c o m b i n e d e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e a n d i n s t r u m e n t a 1 - v a 1 e n c e model As p r o p o s e d i n t h i s s t u d y Ch/ENROLL= E E i j + E1mpj+ E I j k + E V j + E X f r M C f r + E X f M C f + EXeMCe+ E E e l n f + E E e x p I n f + S T I n f j * k w h e r e C h / E n r o l l = C h o i c e t o e n r o l l Impj o r k = The i m p o r t a n c e o f o u t c o m e j o r k; E i j = The s t r e n g t h o f t h e e x p e c t a n c y t h a t a c t i w i l l be f o l l o w e d b y o u t c o m e j ; I j k = The c o g n i z e d i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y o f o u t c o m e j f o r t h e a t t a i n m e n t o f o u t c o m e k; V j o r k = The v a l e n c e o f o u t c o m e j o r k; E X f r M C f r = P e r c e i v e d e x p e c t a t i o n s o f f r i e n d s x m o t i v a t i o n t o c o m p l y ; E X f M C f = P e r c e i v e d e x p e c t a t i o n s o f f a m i l y x m o t i v a t i o n t o c o m p l y ; EXeMCe = P e r c e i v e d e x p e c t a t i o n s o f e m p l o y e r x m o t i v a t i o n t o c o m p l y ; E E e l n f = E d u c a t i o n a l e f f i c a c y x i n f l u e n c e o n d e c i s i o n t o e n r o l l ; E E e x p I n f = E d u c a t i o n a l e f f i c a c y e x p e c t a t i o n s x i n f l u e n c e o n d e c i s i o n t o e n r o l l ; S T I n f = S u i t a b l e n e s s o f s c h e d u l e d t i m e o f p r o g r a m x i n f l u e n c e o n d e c i s i o n t o e n r o l l N o t e = A l l sums t a k e n o v e r j . 57 Hypotheses A p r i n c i p a l and a secondary hypotheses were t e s t e d in the present study. In the primary hypothesis, i t was p o s i t e d that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence, and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models (see Table 1) are equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program. The secondary hypothesis t e s t e d concerned the controversy regarding which mathematical form ( a d d i t i v e or m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of combining the components of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s was a bet t e r p r e d i c t o r of choice behavior. Following M i t c h e l l (1981), i t was po s i t e d that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined expressive-force and instrumental-valence model (See Table 1) are equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g educational program. Summary A review of adult education l i t e r a t u r e f a i l e d to y i e l d an o p e r a t i o n a l conceptual framework to guide the present study. This l e d to a review of the p s y c h o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e that deals with choice behavior. Consequent upon t h i s survey, the force and valence models were f i r s t modified by the a d d i t i o n of importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) and then extended ( M i t c h e l l 58 and Knudsen 1973; Parker and Dyer 1976) using contextual v a r i a b l e s ( M i l l e r 1967; Cl a r k e , 1971; Knox, 1977; Bandura, 1977a; Cross 1981 ) . In the next chapter, the process of instrument development i s discussed. 59 CHAPTER IV INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT A review of the expectancy theory l i t e r a t u r e revealed that the v e r b a l and numerical d e f i n i t i o n s of the theory's component v a r i a b l e s were under considerable debate. Consequently, i t was not p o s s i b l e to locate a standard instrument with e s t a b l i s h e d r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y that d e a l t with d e c i s i o n making w i t h i n an expectancy theory p e r s p e c t i v e . Personal communication with Vroom and with M i t c h e l l , who had r e c e n t l y completed a review of the expectancy theory l i t e r a t u r e , suggested that probably such a published standard instrument d i d not e x i s t . S i m i l a r l y , an examination of the adult education l i t e r a t u r e revealed that standardized instruments have not been developed for measuring the personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s s e l e c t e d for i n v e s t i g a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g l y , i t was necessary to draw upon the various d e f i n i t i o n s of the concepts i n c o n s t r u c t i n g the ques t i o n n a i r e used i n t h i s study. The development of the instrument used i n t h i s study i s discussed i n t h i s chapter i n the f o l l o w i n g order: circumstances n e c e s s i t a t i n g instrument development; determining o b j e c t i v e s for use i n expectancy theory research; measuring of v a r i a b l e s as found i n published l i t e r a t u r e ; determining o b j e c t i v e s p e r t i n e n t to Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c ; determining the instrument's c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y ; d e f i n i n g the p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s o p e r a t i o n a l l y ; d r a f t instrument; conducting the p i l o t t e s t and 60 r e v i s i n g the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Circumstances that Necessitated the  Development of the Instrument Two research questions were addressed in t h i s study. The primary question addressed the issue of whether or not the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the three models: e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined exp r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models, were equa l l y accurate i n p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program. The a n c i l l a r y question examined whether or not the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the mathematical forms ( a d d i t i v e versus m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models were equal l y accurate i n p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal continuing education program. To i n v e s t i g a t e these two questions, an instrument had to be developed that measured each of the v a r i a b l e s . Determining Objectives for Use i n  Expectancy Theory Research The measurement of expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s (expectancy, valence, i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y and importance) i s contingent upon the nature of the o b j e c t i v e s being used. Expectancy r e f e r s to the expectation an i n d i v i d u a l has regarding taking a c t i o n now and achieving the o b j e c t i v e s he d e s i r e s immediately (expressive 61 o b j e c t i v e s ) . I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y r e f e r s to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s expectations regarding how the achievement of o b j e c t i v e A w i l l f a c i l i t a t e the r e a l i z a t i o n of o b j e c t i v e B l a t e r (instrumental o b j e c t i v e s ) . Valence r e f e r s to a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s assessment of the d e s i r a b i l i t y of achieving a set of given o b j e c t i v e s , while importance deals with the p r i o r i t y he gives to achieving those o b j e c t i v e s at the time. The controversy surrounding the o b j e c t i v e s used i n expectancy theory research centers around two iss u e s : how the o b j e c t i v e s are to be se l e c t e d (by the researcher or by the subjects) and how many o b j e c t i v e s are to be used. In a pointed d i s c u s s i o n on the number and s e l e c t i o n of outcomes, M i t c h e l l (1974) noted that determining the number and the a c t u a l mode of s e l e c t i o n of outcomes presents expectancy theory researchers with an "unsolvable dilemma:" L e t t i n g each subject l i s t his...own outcomes...is t h e o r e t i c a l l y best but presents numerous p r a c t i c a l problems. When the i n v e s t i g a t o r generates a l i s t ( e i t h e r a composite from subject's responses or one based on the i n v e s t i g a t o r ' s own knowledge), he...runs the r i s k of h u r t i n g the p r e d i c t i o n with a long l i s t or missing important outcomes with a short l i s t . (p. 1063) Matsui and Ikeda (1976) compared the e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n obt a i n i n g expectancy theory measures between o b j e c t i v e s generated by researchers (standard l i s t ) and those generated by the subjects (self-generated l i s t ) . Using two sets of qu e s t i o n n a i r e s , they obtained motivation measures for studying hard from 77 senior high school g i r l s who were required to generate f i v e outcomes r e s u l t i n g from studying hard, while a 62 standard l i s t of 10 outcomes was administered to a second group of 69 g i r l s . The d a i l y hours spent by the subjects for t h e i r home studie s was used as an index of e f f o r t , and the subj e c t s ' grades at the l a t e s t examinations served as an index of performance. The authors reported mean e f f o r t scores of 2.53 (SD = .76) for the subjects' own outcome group and 2.41 (SD = .87) for the standard l i s t group; while mean performance scores were 37.06 (SD = 5.97) for subjects' own outcome group and 36.14 (SD=5.50) for the standard l i s t group. The d i f f e r e n c e s between the mean e f f o r t scores, the mean performance scores, and the standard d e v i a t i o n s for both groups were not s i g n i f i c a n t . S i m i l a r l y , the d i f f e r e n c e i n c o r r e l a t i o n s of e f f o r t with performance between both groups was not s i g n i f i c a n t . In t h i s regard they reported that E EV and e f f o r t c o r r e l a t e d .44 (p<.00l) for the subjects' own outcome group, versus .28 (p < 0.05) for the standard l i s t group; E EV and performance c o r r e l a t e d .36 (p < .01) for the subjects' own outcome group, versus .23 (p<.05) for the standard l i s t group (pp 291-292). Although Matsui and Ikeda (1976) d i d not compare s a t i s f a c t o r i l y the d i f f e r e n c e i n c o r r e l a t i o n s between the two groups, that computation performed using F i s h e r ' s Z transformation revealed that there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the groups. Thus, i t would appear that the source of o b j e c t i v e s d i d not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of expectancy and valence measures obtained i n expectancy theory research. Schwab, et a l . (1979) conducted "a s t a t i s t i c a l review of 32 expectancy theory based s t u d i e s aimed at accounting " f o r 63 v a r i a t i o n i n t h e s t r e n g t h of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o b s e r v e d i n o t h e r s t u d i e s ( i e . v a r i a n c e e x p l a i n e d as t h e d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e ) between f o r c e t o p e r f o r m and p e r f o r m a n c e o r e f f o r t a s a f u n c t i o n of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e e f f o r t , p e r f o r m a n c e , and f o r c e - t o -p e r f o r m measures ( i . e . t h e i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s ) " ( p . 140). The a u t h o r s r e p o r t e d t h a t " v a r i a n c e e x p l a i n e d i n t h e s e s t u d i e s was g r e a t e r when...10-15 outcomes were i n c l u d e d i n t h e f o r c e measure r a t h e r t h a n a g r e a t e r o r s m a l l e r number of outcomes" ( p . 1 3 9 ) . In l i g h t of t h e Schwab e t a l . (1979) r e s u l t s , M i t c h e l l (1981) n o t e d t h a t a t l e a s t "one p o i n t i s r e l a t i v e l y c l e a r : l a r g e numbers of outcomes d e c r e a s e p r e d i c t a b i l i t y " ( p . 1 4 ) . T h i s g e n e r a l i z a t i o n , he a r g u e d , made s e n s e b e c a u s e l e s s i m p o r t a n t outcomes would p r o b a b l y add more e r r o r t h a n s u b s t a n c e t o t h e f o r c e p r e d i c t i o n . Review o f P r e v i o u s Measurement of  E x p e c t a n c y T h e o r y and A d u l t E d u c a t i o n V a r i a b l e s The d e f i n i t i o n s and measurements o f t h e components of t h e e x p e c t a n c y t h e o r y v a r i a b l e s as w e l l as s e l e c t e d v a r i a b l e s from t h e a d u l t e d u c a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e a r e now p r e s e n t e d . E x p e c t a n c y A c c o r d i n g t o Vroom ( 1 9 6 4 ) , " e x p e c t a n c y i s a momentary b e l i e f c o n c e r n i n g t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r a c t w i l l be f o l l o w e d by a p a r t i c u l a r outcome" ( p . 1 7 ) . I t i s an a c t i o n -outcome a s s o c i a t i o n . I t i s an a n t i c i p a t i o n , u s u a l l y a r o u s e d by s i t u a t i o n a l c u e s , t h a t a g i v e n b e h a v i o r w i l l l e a d t o a s p e c i f i c c o n s e q u e n c e . In t h e c o n t e x t o f t h i s s t u d y i t r e f e r s 64 s p e c i f i c a l l y to the b e l i e f of an i n d i v i d u a l that r e g i s t e r i n g i n a co n t i n u i n g education program at a given moment w i l l provide him with the best opportunity to achieve h i s de s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . The expectancy v a r i a b l e conceptualized as a behavior-outcome r e l a t i o n s h i p has g e n e r a l l y been rated s u b j e c t i v e l y using various scale ranges. For example, Matsui and Ikeda (1976) used a 5-point scale ranging from 4 (most h i g h l y p o s s i b l e ) to 0 (i m p o s s i b l e ) , while Parker and Dyer (1976) used a 10-point scale varying from 0 ( c e r t a i n t y ) to 10 (no chance). Valence Valence r e f e r s to the d e s i r e f o r , or a t t r a c t i o n toward, some d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s by an i n d i v i d u a l , and i s r e l a t e d to the a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n that the attainment of the de s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s w i l l g i v e . In the expectancy theory l i t e r a t u r e controversy over valence has centered around two i s s u e s , namely i t s verbal and numerical d e f i n i t i o n . With regard to i t s verbal d e f i n i t i o n , Vroom (1964), as noted e a r l i e r , defined valence as i n d i c a t i n g a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n . Both M i t c h e l l (1974) and Connolly (1976) ( c i t e d i n Schwab, et a l . , 1979, p.141) have noted that many studie s anchored t h e i r v e r b a l valence scales with importance, which they contended p o t e n t i a l l y represents an a l t e r n a t i v e c o n s t r u c t . Consequently, Connolly (1976) argued that unless the use of importance can be j u s t i f i e d in variance-explained, "there i s a good argument for re t u r n i n g to the o r i g i n a l conception of valence as a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n , or a cl o s e analogue such as a t t r a c t i v e n e s s , d e s i r a b i l i t y , or 65 a n t i c i p a t e d u t i l i t y " ( c i t e d in Schwab, et a l . , 1979, p.40). Schwab, et a l . ( l 9 7 9 ) found "studies that scaled valence only p o s i t i v e l y and that used d e s i r a b i l i t y - - u n d e s i r a b i l i t y as verbal anchors r e s u l t e d i n more variance explained than a l t e r n a t i v e formulations of valence" (p.145). The second area of disagreement regarding valence r e l a t e s to the range of r a t i n g s c a l es used. As pointed out by M i t c h e l l (1974) the most frequently used s c a l e s are those with (5-, 7- or 9- points) in the p o s i t i v e value range. Other researchers have a l s o used s c a l e s with values that range from negative to p o s i t i v e , for example - 4 - - maximum u n d e s i r a b i l i t y to + 4 - -maximum d e s i r a b i l i t y (Parker and Dyer 1976). Schwab, et a l . (1979) reported data which showed that while importance measured on a n e g a t i v e - p o s i t i v e s c a l e explained f i v e percent of the variance, when measured on a p o s i t i v e scale i t explained eight percent of the variance. S i m i l a r l y , while d e s i r a b i l i t y measured on a n e g a t i v e - p o s i t i v e scale explained seven percent of the v a r i a n c e , i t explained 16 percent when measured on a p o s i t i v e scale only. Although these values are r e l a t i v e l y low, the variance explained by measures of i m p o r t a n c e - d e s i r a b i l i t y measured on p o s i t i v e scales c o n s i s t e n t l y explained s l i g h t l y more variance than measures taken with n e g a t i v e - p o s i t i v e s c a l e s . In l i g h t of the Schwab, et a l . (1979) f i n d i n g s , M i t c h e l l (1981) observed that there now i s some agreement on the issue of the valence measure with more variance being explained when the term i s measured as degree of d e s i r a b i l i t y and numerically scaled with p o s i t i v e numbers only. 66 Importance Parker and Dyer (1976), as noted e a r l i e r , used a 25-outcomes model to p r e d i c t the retirement of 702 Naval O f f i c e r s with 68% accuracy. They made a conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n between outcome valence and outcome importance. Outcome valence was equated with outcome d e s i r a b i l i t y while outcome importance was equated with the notion of s i g n i f i c a n c e of the outcome to the retirement d e c i s i o n . They argued that i t "was q u i t e p o s s i b l e for a respondent to see c e r t a i n outcomes as h i g h l y d e s i r a b l e (or un d e s i r a b l e ) , but of l i t t l e or no importance to h i s retirement d e c i s i o n or, conversely, of considerable importance to h i s d e c i s i o n but as being only moderately d e s i r a b l e (or un d e s i r a b l e ) " (p. 106). The authors measured outcome importance by having each respondent choose and rank order from a l i s t of 25 outcomes eight which were most important to him as he made h i s d e c i s i o n to r e t i r e . They reported not only that the outcomes chosen by the subjects as most important had the most p r e d i c t i v e accuracy, but a l s o that the two assessments of valence and importance were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t for a number of outcomes. I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y As has been explained p r e v i o u s l y , i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y r e f e r s to the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l perceives the attainment of outcome B to be dependent on outcome A. Hence, according to Vroom (1964), i t i s an "outcome-outcome a s s o c i a t i o n " which can take on "values ranging from -1, i n d i c a t i n g a b e l i e f that 67 attainment of the second outcome i s c e r t a i n without the f i r s t outcome and impossible with i t , to +1, i n d i c a t i n g that the f i r s t outcome i s b e l i e v e d to be a necessary and s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n for the attainment of the second outcome" (p. 18). Considerable controversy e x i s t s a l s o i n the expectancy theory l i t e r a t u r e regarding the v e r b a l and numerical anchorage of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y . This debate i s s i m i l a r to that surrounding the valence concept discussed e a r l i e r . M i t c h e l l (1974) noted i n h i s review that "most i n v e s t i g a t o r s t r e a t e d the i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y measure as a p r o b a b i l i t y . The subjects estimate the r e l a t i o n s h i p between good performance and some outcome on 5-p o i n t , 7-point, or 10-point s c a l e s . Other techniques used are rank orders, paired comparisons, and forced d i s t r i b u t i o n s " (p. 1064). He argued that i t was important to t r e a t the v a r i a b l e i n the manner suggested by Vroom, namely va r y i n g from -1.00 to +1.00. But given that Schwab, et a l . (1979) have demonstrated e m p i r i c a l l y that valence measured on a p o s i t i v e scale only weighted by a d e s i r a b i l i t y - u n d e s i r a b i l i t y measure accounted for more variance than one scored on a p o s i t i v e and negative s c a l e , i t would seem that i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y can a l s o be scored on a p o s i t i v e s c a l e . Perceived Expectations of Friends, Family and Employer The perceived expectations of f r i e n d s and family were suggested by M i l l e r (1976) and Cross (1981) to be important v a r i a b l e s that i n f l u e n c e d the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of a d u l t s in c o n t i n u i n g education. These v a r i a b l e s have not been employed in e m p i r i c a l research i n adult education. Hence the issue of 68 how to measure them i s yet to be addressed. Among expectancy theory researchers, s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s such as preceived expectations of f r i e n d s , family and employers had not as yet been the focus of intense i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . Hence t h e i r measurement i s not as c o n t r o v e r s i a l . However, M i t c h e l l and Knudsen (1973) have i n v e s t i g a t e d the r e l a t i v e impact of the perceived expectations of peers and fam i l y regarding the choice of business as an occupation among psychology and business students. The authors used a s i n g l e item question: To what extent do your f r i e n d s (or family) expect you to go i n t o business? They measured the responses of t h e i r subjects on a 7-point b i p o l a r scale i . e . very much- very l i t t l e (p 46). S i m i l a r l y , the authors rated the motivation of the respondents to comply with the perceived expectations of t h e i r peers and family on one 7-point b i p o l a r scale i . e . very important - very un important. Parker and Dyer (1976) i n v e s t i g a t e d the i n f l u e n c e of wife and family on the retirement d e c i s i o n making of Naval O f f i c e r s . They measured the influ e n c e of wife and family separately using four questions, one each to e l i c i t the subject's perceptions of the a t t i t u d e of h i s wife and family toward h i s retirement and one each to assess how much importance the subject placed on these perceived a t t i t u d e s . The a t t i t u d e scale p o i n t s ranged from -4 - - s t r o n g l y favored retirement through 0 --no opinion or don't know to +4 - - s t r o n g l y favored continued a c t i v e duty . The importance of the a t t i t u d e s of wife and family to the 69 respondent's retirement d e c i s i o n making was measured on scales ranging from 0 --very unimportant to +8 --very important . Each perceived opinion measure was m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined with the analogous importance value and the r e s u l t i n g two scores were summed (p. 106). E f f i c a c y Expectation Knox (1977) suggested that educational e f f i c a c y , which r e f e r s to an i n d i v i d u a l ' s b e l i e f i n education i n a g l o b a l sense as a means of gaining mastery over h i s environment, was a s s o c i a t e d with high p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s . Further e m p i r i c a l examination of t h i s v a r i a b l e i s yet to be done by adult education researchers. Consequently, there was no precedent on which to base the measurement of the v a r i a b l e . However, because educational e f f i c a c y was perceived as a mental d i s p o s i t i o n based on one's perception of means to ends, the measurement of the v a r i a b l e was done based on s e l f report as commonly used i n l e v e l of a s p i r a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e where 5-; 7-; and 10-point r a t i n g s c a l e s are commonly used ( B a t t l e , 1965). Educat i o n a l Ef f icacy Expectation Bandura (1977) argued that the g l o b a l measurement of expectancy has tended to y i e l d weak r e s u l t s because of the f a i l u r e to d i s t i n g u i s h conceptually between one's expectation (expectancy) and one's perception of h i s a b i l i t y to perform ( s e l f - e f f i c a c y e x p e c t a t i o n ) . He f u r t h e r suggested that more variance i s l i k e l y to be explained by examining the separate c o n t r i b u t i o n s of the two v a r i a b l e s i n research a c t i v i t i e s 70 employing both when the two v a r i a b l e s are used as one (expectancy). Bandura (1977a) using adult snake phobics, measured s e l f - e f f i c a c y and b e h a v i o r i a l change by g e t t i n g h i s subjects to designate on a l i s t of 18 performance tasks ranked in order of i n c r e a s i n g threat those tasks they considered themselves capable of executing. Subjects rated the strength of t h e i r expectations for each of the tasks on a 100-point p r o b a b i l i t y scale arranged i n 10-unit i n t e r v a l s from great u n c e r t a i n t y to complete c e r t a i n t y . The author found that the greater the increase in s e l f - p e r c e i v e d e f f i c a c y , the greater the changes in behavior. S u i t a b i l i t y of Time Clarke (1971) examined previous p a r t i c i p a n t s ' reasons for not r e - e n r o l l i n g in non-credit u n i v e r s i t y c o n t i n u i n g education programs. He used a l i s t of 30 reasons people d i d not re-e n r o l l . He requested h i s subjects to s e l e c t from the l i s t those that i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r not r e t u r n i n g for f u r t h e r courses. He found that s u i t a b i l i t y of time was an important c o n s i d e r a t i o n . Clarke's study, i t would seem , i s the only one that has reported on time r e l a t i v e to re-enrollment i n the adult education l i t e r a t u r e . A p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t engages in the process of enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n l i g h t of h i s expectations of achieving c e r t a i n o b j e c t i v e s which he d e s i r e s . Consequently, the assessment of the v a r i a b l e s that could i n f l u e n c e an 71 i n d i v i d u a l s ' enrollment d e c i s i o n making have to be done i n l i g h t of s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s . Accordingly, i n the next s e c t i o n , how the o b j e c t i v e s used i n the context of the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c were determined i s discussed. Determining O b j e c t i v e s  Pert i nent to the Context of Chautauqua by the Pac i f i c The f i r s t step i n developing an appropriate measurement instrument was to assemble o b j e c t i v e s , the attainment of which are known to be sought by a d u l t s . Two types of o b j e c t i v e s were needed: those a t t a i n a b l e w i t h i n the context of l e a r n i n g (expressive) and those that can be achieved outside the context of the educational experience f o l l o w i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n ( i n s t r u m e n t a l ) . The 15 expressive and 15 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s developed and v a l i d a t e d by Marcus (1976) were considered i n i t i a l l y . He reported an E x p r e s s i v e / I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y (E/I) ambiguity r a t i o of 0.07 for the 30 items (p. 328). He f u r t h e r arranged the 30 items i n a l t e r n a t e order, the odd numbered items being expressive, the even numbered instr u m e n t a l . He reported a s p l i t - h a l f r e l i a b i l i t y c o r r e c t e d by the Spearman-Brown formula for each of the two subscales of .90 based on the responses of 400 persons. In the p r e l i m i n a r y stages of the development of the instrument for t h i s study, a l l 15 of Marcus' expressive o b j e c t i v e s were used as were 13 from h i s instrumental o b j e c t i v e s subscale. The two o b j e c t i v e s that were deleted from the 72 o r i g i n a l 15 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s were "to complete a required step i n earning a degree, diploma or c e r t i f i c a t e " , and "to meet some formal requirements of the school or a l i c e n s i n g a u t h o r i t y " . These o b j e c t i v e s were not relevant i n the context of t h i s study. They were replaced by the f o l l o w i n g two o b j e c t i v e s : 1) to maintain or improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have and 2) to learn things to t a l k about. Both of these o b j e c t i v e s were obtained from Marcus' o r i g i n a l pool of 100 items. The 30 o b j e c t i v e s were arranged f o l l o w i n g Marcus (1976), with the odd numbers being expressive and the even numbers instru m e n t a l . These o b j e c t i v e s were then rated by a panel of 10 judges chosen for t h e i r e x p e r t i s e i n the content area of adult education. The membership of t h i s v a l i d a t i o n panel c o n s i s t e d of two professors from the D i v i s i o n of Adult Education of the Facu l t y of Education, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia; three s t a f f members from the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre for Continuing Education who were a l s o members of the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c o r g a n i z i n g committee, and f i v e students i n the second year of t h e i r d o c t o r a l programs i n adult education i n the D i v i s i o n of Adult Education, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. Seven of the judges a l s o cooperated in a fol l o w up interview conducted at the time the r a t i n g sheets of o b j e c t i v e s were c o l l e c t e d as w e l l as at subsequent points i n the instrument development. The p a n e l i s t s were given a "Now-Later S a t i s f a c t i o n Rating Sheet" (Appendix A). The "Now" designated expressive o b j e c t i v e s 73 which were a t t a i n a b l e w i t h i n the immediate context of l e a r n i n g while "Later" represented instrumental o b j e c t i v e s which were a t t a i n a b l e outside the immediate context of l e a r n i n g . The p a n e l i s t s were asked to rate each o b j e c t i v e according to the time of s a t i s f a c t i o n . The f o l l o w i n g f i v e point nominal scale was used: s a t i s f a c t i o n now subdivided i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s : with doubt and without doubt; and s a t i s f a c t i o n l a t e r subdivided i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s : with doubt and without doubt. The f i f t h category was to be used for those o b j e c t i v e s considered to be ambiguous. The r e s u l t s of the p a n e l i s t s ' r a t i n g s are summarized i n Table 2 for each o b j e c t i v e . A d i s c u s s i o n of how the p a n e l i s t s ' r e a c t i o n s to the o b j e c t i v e s i n f l u e n c e d the s e l e c t i o n of the set of o b j e c t i v e s that were used in the instrument p i l o t t ested i s presented i n Appendix A. T a b l e 2 Judges' C l a s s i f i c a t i o n of O b j e c t i v e s REASON FOR ENROLLING SAT. NOW -D +D SAT. LATER AMB -D +D 1 . + 2. + 3 4. 5. 6. + 7. 8. * 9 To l e a r n l e a r n i n g , j u s t f o r the sake of To s e c u r e p r e s e n t j o b c a r e e r . advancement i n my or o c c u p a t i o n a l To s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y about the s u b j e c t taught i n t h i s c o u r s e or program. To a c q u i r e knowledge or s k i l l s t h a t w i l l h e l p me i n o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l c o u r s e s which I i n t e n d t o t a k e . To prove t o myself t h a t I am ca p a b l e of l e a r n i n g the s u b j e c t or s k i l l t aught i n t h i s c o u r s e or program. To p r e p a r e m y s e l f t o be a b l e t o serv e o t h e r s i n a p a r t i c u l a r way. To l e a r n about the s u b j e c t taught i n t h i s c o u r s e or program f o r i t s own sake. To c a r r y out a s t e p i n a p l a n I have made f o r myself aimed a t a c h i e v i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . To escape an unhappy r e l a t i o n s h i p by h a v i n g something i n p a r t i c u l a r t o do w i t h my ti m e . 10 Table 2 -- Continued REASON FOR ENROLLING SAT. NOW -D +D SAT. LATER -D +D AMB 10. + 1 1 * 12. 1 3 1 4 * 15. 16, + 17 + 18 * 19, * 20, To get ready for a examination i n a f i e l d . government part i c u l a r To enjoy the sensation of i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . To catch up to others, such as my spouse, f r i e n d s , r e l a t i v e s , business a s s o c i a t e s or competitors. To f u l f i l l a need other people. to be with To improve my general a b i l i t y to serve mankind. To share a common i n t e r e s t i n the subject with one or more other people (such as spouse or f r i e n d s ) who are studying the same subject at the same time. To q u a l i f y for membership i n a group I want to j o i n . To l e a r n something or engage i n an a c t i v i t y which I p a r t i c u l a r l y enjoy. To maintain or improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have. To achieve the t h r i l l of mastering the p a r t i c u l a r subject or s k i l l taught i n t h i s course or program. To get accepted by others who w i l l respect me more provided I le a r n the subject or s k i l l taught i n t h i s course or program. 10 76 Table 2 — Continued REASON FOR ENROLLING SAT. NOW -D +D SAT. LATER -D +D AMB + 21 * 22. 23 24. 25 26. * 27. * 28. * 29. * 30. To break the routine of home or work. To l e a r n new things to t a l k about. To attend because that i s what I am being paid to do. To increase my competence to achieve my goals. To do something, such as read, w r i t e , experiment, or e x e r c i s e , that I l i k e to do. To l e a r n the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n t h i s course or program so that I w i l l be able e v e n t u a l l y to share a common i n t e r e s t with other persons. To k i l l time which I don't know what to do with otherwise. To l e a r n to make my p o s i t i o n i n l i f e more secure. Tp search for t r u t h . To prepare myself better so that I can escape the f r u s t r a t i o n s of the way I l i v e now. 10 2 4 Note: Odd numbers= expressive o b j e c t i v e s ; Even numbers= instrumental o b j e c t i v e s . where SAT. NOW = S a t i s f a c t i o n Now SAT. LATER= S a t i s f a c t i o n Later -D= Without Doubt +D= With Doubt AMB= Ambiguous += change of format *= dropped 77 Determining Instrument's Comprehensibi1ity  C a t e g o r i z i n g Objectives The f o l l o w i n g three d e c i s i o n r u l e s were used to determine which o b j e c t i v e s to r e t a i n , reformulate or e l i m i n a t e . i ) There must be ten o b j e c t i v e s i n each category. This d e c i s i o n was based on the study by Schwab, et a l . , (1979) noted e a r l i e r i n which they found that s t u d i e s that used 10-15 o b j e c t i v e s tended to have a higher p r e d i c t i v e accuracy than those that used more or l e s s . i i ) O b j ectives with at l e a s t one ambiguous r a t i n g are to be f u r t h e r confirmed i n the fol l o w up i n t e r v i e w s . An item was considered ambiguous i f i t had more than one meaning, or i f i t s meaning was u n c e r t a i n . i i i ) O b j ectives must be relevant and not o f f e n s i v e . Such o b j e c t i v e s were s c r u t i n i z e d and dropped i f concerns were r a i s e d by the judges interviewed. This r e f i n i n g e x e r c i s e was executed i r r e s p e c t i v e of the degree to which the o b j e c t i v e i n question had been rated as belonging c l e a r l y to one category or the other. Employing these three c r i t e r i a , o b j e c t i v e s 9, 15, 19, 23, 25, 27 and 29 were dropped from the set of expressive o b j e c t i v e s and 10, 12, 16, 20, 22, 28 and 30 were r e j e c t e d from the instrumental s e t . Objectives 2, 3, 7, 11, 17, 18 and 21 were reformulated (see Table 2 and Appendix A — i n s t r u m e n t development). The d e l e t i o n of seven o b j e c t i v e s from each set meant that both the expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s were 78 short of the required 10 by two. Consequently, two o b j e c t i v e s were added to both s e t s : o b j e c t i v e s g and h for the expressive o b j e c t i v e s (see Table 3 ) and o b j e c t i v e s i and j for the instrumental o b j e c t i v e s (see Table 4 ) . The second d r a f t of the two sets of o b j e c t i v e s was used in the p i l o t t e s t performed. Table 3 Expressive Object i v e s : P i l o t Test a. Learn for the sake of l e a r n i n g b. S a t i s f y my c u r i o u s i t y about the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n the programs. c. Prove to myself that I am capable of l e a r n i n g the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n the programs. d. Become a better informed person about adult education. e. P a r t i c i p a t e in an enjoyable i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . f. F u l f i l a need to be with other people. g. V i s i t Vancouver while p a r t i c i p a t i n g . h. Break the routine of home i . Break the routine of work. j . Engage i n an a c t i v i t y which I p a r t i c u l a r l y enjoy. 79 Table 4 Instrumental Object ives j_ P i l o t Test a. Enable me to advance i n my present occupational career. b. Help me i n other educational courses which I intend to take. c. Prepare me to be able to serve others i n a p a r t i c u l a r way. d. Enable me to carry out a step i n a plan I have made for myself aimed at achieving a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . e. Enable me to improve my general a b i l i t y to serve mankind. f. Enable me to improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have. g. Enable me to increase my competence to achieve my goals. h. Enable me to l e a r n the subjects or s k i l l s taught in the programs so that I w i l l be able e v e n t u a l l y to share a common i n t e r e s t with other persons. i . Give me an opportunity to make contacts for p o s s i b l e job openings. j . Give me an opportunity to r e f l e c t on my p r a c t i c e . Operational D e f i n i t i o n s of the  Pr e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s In t h i s s e c t i o n the o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s of the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s are described: d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s , 80 expectancy, valence, importance, i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , perceived expectations of f r i e n d s m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply, perceived expectations of- family m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply, perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply, educational e f f i c a c y m u l t i p l i e d by i t s i n f l u e n c e on enrollment d e c i s i o n making, educational e f f i c a c y expectation m u l t i p l i e d by . i t s i n f l u e n c e on enrollment d e c i s i o n making and s u i t a b i l i t y of time m u l t i p l i e d by i t s i n f l u e n c e on enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Using Desired Object ives to  Derive the Scores of V a r i a b l e s Twenty objectives--10 expressive and 10 instrumental-- were developed and used for t h i s study (see Tables 3 and 4). The 20 o b j e c t i v e s were used to obtain the scores for each v a r i a b l e r e l a t i v e to each model: expectancy, valence and importance for the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and importance for the instrumental-valence model. For example, an i n d i v i d u a l ' s expectancy score was obtained by d e r i v i n g the sum of the r a t i n g s he gave to the 10 expressive o b j e c t i v e s each measured on a 5- point r a t i n g s c a l e . Expectancy Measures of expectancy for each i n d i v i d u a l on each of the 10 expressive o b j e c t i v e s were obtained using a 5-point L i k e r t -type s c a l e . One equalled c e r t a i n that enrollment w i l l not r e s u l t i n the attainment of the o b j e c t i v e and 5 represented 81 c e r t a i n that enrollment w i l l r e s u l t i n the attainment of the object i v e . Valence A 5-point b i p o l a r d e s i r a b i l i t y s cale was constructed to measure valence r e l a t i v e to each of the 10 o b j e c t i v e s of the two models. One represented very undesirable while 5 represented very d e s i r a b l e . Importance Importance was measured on a 5-point b i p o l a r s c a l e where 1 meant that the s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e under c o n s i d e r a t i o n was of lowest p r i o r i t y in the.subject's enrollment d e c i s i o n making and 5 meant that i t was of the highest p r i o r i t y . An importance measure was obtained for each of the 10 expressive and 10 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s considered. Instrumentali ty Measures of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y for each i n d i v i d u a l r e l a t i v e to each of the 10 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s were obtained using a 5-point b i p o l a r scale where 1 equalled very strong b e l i e f that the attainment of the o b j e c t i v e was e n t i r e l y independent of enrollment and 5 represented very strong b e l i e f that the attainment of the o b j e c t i v e was e n t i r e l y dependent upon enrollment. 82 Perceived Expectation of F r i e n d s , Family and Employer The measurement of perceived expectation of f r i e n d s , perceived expectations of f a m i l y , and perceived expectations of employer was done by requesting each subject to respond to a s i n g l e item question for each of the component v a r i a b l e s . A 5-point b i p o l a r scale ranging from 1--very discouraging to 5--very encouraging was used. This response provided an i n d i c a t i o n of a respondent's perception of h i s f r i e n d ' s , family's and employer's expectations regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e in the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . M o t i v a t i o n to Comply To measure motivation to comply, each subject was requested to i n d i c a t e the importance to h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making of h i s perceived expectations of h i s f r i e n d s , family and employer regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to e n r o l l i n the s p e c i f i c c o n t i n u i n g education program. These r a t i n g s were made using a 5-point b i p o l a r scale ranging from 1--strong negative i n f l u e n c e to 5--strong p o s i t i v e i n f l u e n c e . Educational E f f i c a c y Educational e f f i c a c y r e f e r r e d to the extent to which a respondent b e l i e v e d in education as a means to ends in a g l o b a l sense. This v a r i a b l e was measured using a 5-point b i p o l a r scale ranging from 1 — s t r o n g l y d i s b e l i e v e to 5 — s t r o n g l y b e l i e v e . The i n f l u e n c e of educational e f f i c a c y on enrollment d e c i s i o n making was measured as importance with scales ranging 83 from 1--lowest p r i o r i t y to 5 — h i g h e s t p r i o r i t y . E ducational E f f i c a c y Expectation Educational e f f i c a c y expectation r e f e r r e d to the respondent's estimation of h i s a b i l i t y to execute the program. Subjects responded to a s i n g l e item question measured on a 5-point b i p o l a r s cale ranging from 1--incapable to 5--extremely capable. S i m i l a r l y , the i n f l u e n c e of educational e f f i c a c y expectation on enrollment d e c i s i o n making was measured as importance with scales ranging from 1 — lowest p r i o r i t y to 5--highest p r i o r i t y . S u i t a b i l i t y of Time In t h i s study, the s u i t a b i l i t y of time r e f e r r e d to the s u i t a b l e n e s s of the time to the e n r o l l e e the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c was being o f f e r e d . Each subject was requested to provide an estimate of the i n f l u e n c e the s u i t a b l e n e s s of the time the program was being o f f e r e d had on h i s enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Two questions were used to e l i c i t t h i s informat i o n : a) Is Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981 scheduled at a time s u i t a b l e for you to attend? The response was anchored numerically on a 5-point scale where 1 equalled u n s u i t a b l e and 5 extremely s u i t a b l e . b) To what extent d i d the scheduling of the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c i n f l u e n c e your enrollment 84 d e c i s i o n ? The response to t h i s question was e l i c i t e d as an importance measure on a 5-point scale as i n d i c a t e d above. In a d d i t i o n to measures of the v a r i a b l e s already described, the f o l l o w i n g socio-demographic and educational data were c o l l e c t e d : gender, age, employment s t a t u s , source of knowledge about Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981, highest educational q u a l i f i c a t i o n and time since l a s t p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a c o n t i n u i n g education program. One component of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models described i n chapter I I I and summarized in Table 1 concerned a respondent's perception of the i n f l u e n c e f r i e n d s , family and employers had on h i s p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Consequently, data were c o l l e c t e d along with the socio-demographic and educational v a r i a b l e s to determine whether or not respondents had c l o s e contact with t h e i r f r i e n d s and f a m i l i e s and i f such persons in f l u e n c e d t h e i r d e c i s i o n s . In a d d i t i o n to the data described above, three questions were asked about the fees charged for the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c (see Appendix B, q u e s t i o n n a i r e s e c t i o n I , items 5, 6 and 7). These questions were included i n response to a request from the organizers of the program who wanted to know what the opinions of the subjects were regarding the fees. Given that the information on fees was not part of the c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of t h i s study, i t was not included i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s . 85 Draft Instrument The d r a f t instrument p i l o t t e s t e d c o n s i s t e d of nine p a r t s . Section one had 10 items made up as f o l l o w s : items one and two asked about age and gender, t h r e e - - l e v e l of education, four--recency of p a r t i c i p a t i o n in an education program, f i v e , s i x and seven--fees, eight--contact with f r i e n d s , nine--contact with family and ten—employment s t a t u s . Section two had 12 items. Two items were used to determine the extent to which each of the f o l l o w i n g s i x v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c e d the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of the s u b j e c t s : f r i e n d s , f a m i l y , employer, educational e f f i c a c y , educational e f f i c a c y expectations, and s u i t a b i l i t y of time. Sections three, four and f i v e dealt with expectancy, valence and importance r e s p e c t i v e l y with each v a r i a b l e being measured using ten items (10 expressive o b j e c t i v e s ) . Sections s i x , seven and eight were r e l a t e d to i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and importance r e s p e c t i v e l y with each v a r i a b l e being measured using ten items (10 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s ) . In s e c t i o n nine respondents were requested to l i s t o b j e c t i v e s or other reasons not included i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e which i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. A copy of the instrument without s e c t i o n nine (see p. 96: post p i l o t study amendments to q u e s t i o n n a i r 86 P i l o t Test The instrument was p i l o t t e s t e d with twenty i n d i v i d u a l s , 10 of whom had p r e - r e g i s t e r e d for the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c by May 15 and 10 of whom had not. These 20 i n d i v i d u a l s were administered the instrument i n the week of May 17-23, 1981. Members of both samples were drawn on the basis of t h e i r residence i n the Vancouver Mainland area. This c r i t e r i o n was used to f o r e s t a l l the d i f f i c u l t i e s that would have r e s u l t e d i f the sample had been randomly drawn from the e n t i r e Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c m a i l i n g l i s t of approximately 10,000 persons l i v i n g in a l l areas of Canada and the United States. Furthermore, another added advantage of adopting the sampling strategy employed during t h i s p i l o t stage was to ensure that known groups in terms of t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n s were used. The ten p r e - r e g i s t e r e d subjects were randomly drawn from the l i s t of 111 persons who had e n r o l l e d by May 15, 1981. The other 10 subjects were made up of i n d i v i d u a l s whom the i n v e s t i g a t o r , i n c o n s u l t a t i o n with the UBC/CCE s t a f f members connected with the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981 o r g a n i z a t i o n , b e l i e v e d were most l i k e l y not to e n r o l l . Nine of the 10 subjects were drawn from the l i s t of 12 members of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia D i v i s i o n of Adult Education F i e l d Advisory Committee 1980-81 who were connected with the or g a n i z a t i o n of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . The remaining three of the 12 members were from outside Vancouver, hence t h e i r cooperation could not be u t i l i s e d w i t h i n the time the p i l o t t e s t 87 was conducted. I t was recognized that the s e l e c t e d nine i n d i v i d u a l s were l i k e l y not to be a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample of non-enrollees because of t h e i r unique r e l a t i o n s h i p with the program. I t was nonetheless decided to p i l o t t e s t the instrument with t h i s group given that dt was necessary to t e s t the instrument with known groups and the f a c t t h a t , at the time of the p i l o t t e s t , i t was not p o s s i b l e to p r e d i c t with c e r t a i n t y who was not going to e n r o l l for the program. The tenth subject was randomly drawn from the m a i l i n g l i s t of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s . A package c o n t a i n i n g a questionnaire was p e r s o n a l l y d e l i v e r e d by the i n v e s t i g a t o r to each of the respondents on the 19th and 20th of May 1981, and the completed instruments were c o l l e c t e d on the 21st and 22nd of May 1981. Of the 20 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s administered, 16 (80%) were c o l l e c t e d duly completed with equal numbers from each group. A thank you l e t t e r (Appendix A) was w r i t t e n to a l l twenty subjects of the p i l o t study i n a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to cooperate i n f i l l i n g out the instrument at such short n o t i c e . A n a l y s i s of P i l o t Data A socio-demographic and educational d e s c r i p t i o n of the p i l o t t e s t samples was obtained using the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s r a g e , gender, educational background, employment s t a t u s , source of knowledge of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c and s o c i a l i n f l u e n c e s . The r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s are presented in Table 5. 88 Table 5 P i l o t Study: Socio-demographic and Educational C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ENROLLEES NON-EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLEES (n = £ 5) (n = 8) Freq. % Freq. % AGE 30-34 2 25.0 1 12.5 35-39 0 0.0 0 0.0 40-44 2 25.0 3 37.5 45-49 2 25.0 2 25.0 50 or more 2 25.0 2 25.0 GENDER Men 2 25.0 7 87.5 Women 6 75.0 1 12.5 SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PROGRAM Journal Not Checked 8 100.0 8 100.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 Newsletter Not Checked 8 1 00.0 8 1 00.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 Resource Person Not Checked 8 100.0 8 1 00.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 F l y e r Not Checked 8 100.0 8 100.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 Table 5 -- Continued SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ENROLLEES NON-EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLEES (n = E !) (n = 8) Freq. % Freq. % SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PROGRAM Mailed Brochure Not Checked 2 25.0 2 25.0 Checked 6 75.0 6 75.0 Aquaintance Not Checked 6 75.0 5 62.5 Chec ked 2 25.0 3 37.5 Fri e n d Not Checked 7 87.5 8 100.0 Checked 1 12.5 0 0.0 Colleague Not Checked 6 75.0 8 100.0 Checked 2 25.0 0 0.0 Can't Remember Not Checked 8 1 00.0 8 1 00.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 Others Not Checked 8 100.0 8 1 00.0 Checked 0 0.0 0 0.0 Highest Educational Q u a l i f i c a t ion Other T e r t i a r y Qual. 1 12.5 0 0.0 P a r t i a l U n i v e r s i t y 1 12.5 0 0.0 U n i v e r s i t y Degree 3 37.5 2 25.0 U n i v e r s i t y Degree Plus 3 37.5 6 75.0 90 Table 5 — Continued SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ENROLLEES NON-EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLEES (n = £ 5) (n = 8) Freq. % Freq. % Time Since Last Part i c i pat ion 6 to 10 Years 0 0.0 2 25.0 3 to 5 Years 1 12.5 1 12.5 1 to 2 Years 3 37.5 0 0.0 Less Than 1 Year 4 50.0 5 62.5 Employment Status Self-employed 0 0.0 1 12.5 Employed by Organization 8 1 00.0 7 87.5 Having Friends With Whom To Discuss P a r t i c i p a t i o n In Chautauqua No 0 0.0 0 0.0 Yes 8 1 00.0 8 100.0 Friends' Influence On Decision No 6 75.6 5 62.5 Yes 2 25.0 3 37.5 Having Close Contact With Family Members No 2 2.0 1 12.5 Yes 6 75.0 7 87.5 Family Influence On Decision No 7 87.5 4 50.0 Yes 1 12.5 4 50.0 Socio-demographic V a r i a b l e s The f i r s t s e c t i o n of the quest i o n n a i r e (Appendix B) contained four items r e l a t e d to the socio-demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the samples. The v a r i a b l e s included were age, gender, educational background and employment s t a t u s . As 91 i s evident from Table 5, the two samples were each made up mostly of p r o f e s s i o n a l s employed i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i n t h e i r middle ages, of above average educational backgrounds, and to a large extent c o n s t a n t l y u t i l i z i n g c ontinuing educational fac i 1 i t i e s . Socio-educational V a r i a b l e s Source of knowledge about Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Of the 13 a l t e r n a t i v e responses that were provided (see Table 5 and Appendix B) mailed brochured was the main source from which the samples ( e n r o l l e e s 75% and non-enrollees 50%) obtained information about the program. Soc i a l I n f l u e n c e s . One of the questions advanced for v e r i f i c a t i o n i n t h i s study was whether or not p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s had any s u b j e c t i v e perception of t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making being i n f l u e n c e d by such s i g n i f i c a n t others as f r i e n d s , family and employer and the extent to which these persons i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r d e c i s i o n s . As shown in Table 5, a l l the i n d i v i d u a l s i n each of the samples had f r i e n d s but for the m a j o r i t y of the samples ( e n r o l l e e s 75% and non-enrollees 63%), these f r i e n d s d i d not i n f l u e n c e t h e i r d e c i s i o n s . S i m i l a r l y , the respondents i n each of the two samples i n d i c a t e d that they d i d have cl o s e contact with t h e i r f a m i l i e s . However, i t would seem that while family members d i d not i n f l u e n c e the d e c i s i o n s of the e n r o l l e e s (87%), the i n f l u e n c e of such family members on the d e c i s i o n s of the non-enrollees was moderate (50%). 92 Taken together t h e r e f o r e , i t would seem that f r i e n d s and family members do not s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e the d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to a program. R e l i a b i l i t y of Instrument j_ Expectancy  Theory V a r i a b l e s Item analyses of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s i n the t e s t s of the exp r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models were performed separately for the e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees. The means, standard d e v i a t i o n s and i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c i e s computed using LERTAP (a computer program w r i t t e n to perform item a n a l y s i s [Nelson, 1974]) are presented i n Table 6. 93 Table 6 P i l o t Test: Means, Standard. D e v i a t i o n s , and R e l i a b i l i t i e s of the Expectancy Theory Components of the Models E n r o l l e e Non-enrollee Number (n = 8) (n = 8) Test of Mean I n t e r n a l Mean I n t e r n a l items (SD) Consistency (SD) Consistency Expectancy 1 0 38.38 .02 a 18.88 .91 a (3.66) (8.01) Valence 10 37.00 .39 22.38 .89 (3.70) (8.25) Importance 10 26.53 .84 1 5.75 .90 (6.91) (7.30) I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y 1 0 28. 1 3 0.00 a 23.63 .94 a (2.64) (7.46) Valence 1 0 35.63 .88 27.88 .93 (6.19) (8.25) Importance 1 0 26. 1 3 .80 8.75 .92 (9.22 (9.54) a = Hoyt's Estimate of R e l i a b i l i t y (1941) Of the 12 i n t e r n a l consistency c o e f f i c i e n t s , nine were greater than or equal to 0.80. Examination of the scores for the remaining three t e s t s : expectancy, valence and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y obtained from the e n r o l l e e s revealed that most of the subjects i n the group tended to check c o n s i s t e n t l y the same a l t e r n a t i v e s r e l a t i v e to the 10 o b j e c t i v e s of the r e s p e c t i v e v a r i a b l e s , thereby reducing the v a r i a b i l i t y among responses. Post P i l o t Study Amendments to the Questionnaire In a d d i t i o n to g i v i n g the instrument to twenty p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , the i n v e s t i g a t o r d i s t r i b u t e d i t at the same time to seven of the judges for f u r t h e r s c r u t i n y . Together with the p i l o t t e s t data, the responses of the seven judges were used to fur t h e r 94 amend the questionnaire (Appendix B). The changes that were made, beginning with s e c t i o n I, were as f o l l o w s : In Section I, General Information, one change was made. Question number 3 had read "What i s the highest educational q u a l i f i c a t i o n you hold? (check only one)", and had a range of seven p o s s i b i l i t i e s . The problem here was that a few of the respondents made some c a n c e l l a t i o n s i n answering that question. A d i s c u s s i o n with two of the subjects who went through that process before checking only one showed that they had somehow overlooked the (check only one) request. Hence i n the r e v i s e d f i n a l form of the instrument the request (CHECK ONLY ONE) was c a p i t a l i z e d . Four changes were made to Section I I , Extent of Perceived S o c i a l Influences on Decision to E n r o l l : a) Item 4(a) r e f e r r e d to the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l b e l i e v e d education to be a mechanism for gaining mastery over h i s l i f e . The issue r a i s e d here was that the former s u b - t i t l e " S e l f " d i d not adequately prepare one mentally to comprehend the question. This was changed to "Educational U t i l i t y " . b) Item 5(a) had read "To what extent do you consider y o u r s e l f capable of b e n e f i t i n g i n t e l l e c t u a l l y from p a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981?" The v a r i a b l e that t h i s item was attempting to measure was educational e f f i c a c y e xpectation, namely the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l perceived himself i n t e l l e c t u a l l y capable of accomplishing the o b j e c t i v e s of a p a r t i c u l a r l e a r n i n g experience. The question as s t a t e d above was considered not to be e x a c t l y on t a r g e t . Consequently, the f o l l o w i n g was suggested: "To what extent do you think you are capable of mastering the s k i l l s to 95 be presented at Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981?" The seven judges agreed that t h i s wording was superior in terms of conceptual anchorage to the former. I t was a c c o r d i n g l y adopted. Following t h i s change i t s s u b - t i t l e , which had been " B e n e f i t " , was changed to "Personal A b i l i t y " to a p p r o p r i a t e l y r e f l e c t i t s new d e f i n i t i o n a l connotat io n . c) Section II had s i x v a r i a b l e s , namely f r i e n d s , f a m i l y , employer, educational u t i l i t y , personal a b i l i t y and time. Each of these v a r i a b l e s was presented as a statement to which respondents were requested to i n d i c a t e the strength of t h e i r a t t i t u d e . These v a r i a b l e s were each weighted by a second component designed to determine the extent to which the nature of the strength of a t t i t u d e expressed with respect to each of the f i r s t v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c e d each i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making. The problem therefore was that i f each of the f i r s t s i x v a r i a b l e s had t h e i r scales f u l l y l a b e l l e d 1 through 5 while the second component of each v a r i a b l e had only t h e i r two poles l a b e l l e d with the i n t e r v e n i n g 2, 3 and 4 u n l a b e l l e d , i t could t h e r e f o r e be assumed erronously that they had the same meaning as t h e i r l a b e l l e d preceding counterparts. To e l i m i n a t e t h i s p o s s i b l e confusion, i t was decided to l a b e l a l l the s c a l e s i n t h i s s e c t i o n 1 through 5. Section IV and V I I I , D e s i r a b i l i t y of Achieving Objectives as they r e l a t e d to the expressive or instrumental models r e s p e c t i v e l y , r e f e r r e d to the degree to which an i n d i v i d u a l wanted to achieve an o b j e c t i v e because of the a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n he b e l i e v e d i t would give to him. A problem with the anchored s c a l e was noted. One judge wondered how a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n could be 96 undesirable. The a l t e r n a t i v e suggested was " a n t i c i p a t e d achievement of the o b j e c t i v e i s undesirable." The remaining s i x judges concured with the suggestion. Accordingly, i t was adopted. In s e c t i o n s I I I , IV and V, two of the judges suggested items in the set of expressive o b j e c t i v e s be changed to read " p a r t i c i p a t e in an enjoyable i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . " The remaining f i v e judges agreed; thus t h i s change was adopted. Section IX, Unique Reasons for P a r t i c i p a t i o n , was i n s e r t e d to enable the i n v e s t i g a t o r to f i n d out i f there were p e r t i n e n t reasons that i n f l u e n c e d the sample's enrollment d e c i s i o n making that were not included among the v a r i a b l e s used i n the p i l o t t e s t instrument. I t was hoped that i f there were, and the same reasons were repeated across s u b j e c t s , such o b j e c t i v e s would be included i n the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Since no such a d d i t i o n a l reasons emerged from the p i l o t t e s t , t h i s s e c t i o n was deleted from the instrument, reducing the number of sec t i o n s to e i g h t . With the preceding amendments made, the instrument as i t appears i n Appendix B, was used i n the main study. Summary The lack of an e s t a b l i s h e d instrument to measure the v a r i a b l e s of t h i s study n e c e s s i t a t e d the development of the one presented i n Appendix B. The process included both the determination of o b j e c t i v e s p e r t i n e n t to the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c and the assessment of the instrument's c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y . 97 The e x p e r t i s e of 10 judges was used to c l a s s i f y the o b j e c t i v e s i n t o expressive and instrumental c a t e g o r i e s as w e l l as to evaluate the instrument as a composite whole. In t h i s regard, the suggestions of seven of the 10 judges who cooperated in f o l l o w up interviews were u t i l i z e d c o n s i d e r a b l y . The instrument was then p i l o t t e s t e d a f t e r which f u r t h e r amendments were made to the qu e s t i o n n a i r e . In Chapter V, the method used i n the data c o l l e c t i o n i s discussed. 98 CHAPTER V DESIGN OF THE STUDY As was i n d i c a t e d i n the preceding d i s c u s s i o n , the purpose of t h i s study was to determine what combination of s e l e c t e d expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s and personal and environmental f a c t o r s considered simultaneously served best to d i s t i n g u i s h between p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who subsequently e n r o l l e d i n an adult education program and those who d i d not. To address t h i s problem of enrollment d e c i s i o n making, i t was necessary to work with a population that allowed for a design where data could be c o l l e c t e d from persons who had made the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l in an educational program p r i o r to i t s commencement and a comparative set of data from persons who had not registered.by the s t a r t of the program. This chapter discusses the processes used i n c a r r y i n g out t h i s study. F i r s t , the context of the study i s described. This i s followed by i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the population of i n t e r e s t and the procedures used to s e l e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e samples. The data c o l l e c t i o n procedures used are then d e s c r i b e d , followed by a d i s c u s s i o n of the data preparation and analyses. Context of the Study To undertake t h i s study, i t was necessary to loc a t e an educational program with: ( i ) a large m a i l i n g l i s t of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s , ( i i ) an a c t i v e promotional s t r a t e g y , and ( i i i ) program organizers that were w i l l i n g to cooperate i n the study. 99 The Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c program, with a m a i l i n g l i s t of approximately 10,000 names,satisfied these three c o n d i t i o n s . Chautauqua by the Pac i f i c General D e s c r i p t i o n . In the 1981 brochure mailed to the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s by the organizers of the program, Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c was described as "a week long program of p r o f e s s i o n a l development for adu l t and co n t i n u i n g educators. I t c o n s i s t s of one-day i n s t i t u t e s , and two, three and five-day workshops designed to appeal to adult educators i n a v a r i e t y of s e t t i n g s " (UBC/CCE, p.2, 1981). As a way of p r o v i d i n g a h i s t o r i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e , the organizers noted t h a t : "Chautauqua" i s an h i s t o r i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t educational i n s t i t u t i o n which orginated i n 1874 i n New York State as a summer school for t r a i n i n g of Sunday School Teachers. In time i t became a broad educational a c t i v i t y , p r i m a r i l y f o r a d u l t s , and made up of a number of events occuring simultaneously. (UBC/CCE, p.2, 1981) Enrollment H i s t o r y UBC/CCE. The f i r s t Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c conducted by the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre for Continuing Education (UBC/CCE) was i n 1973. The UBC/CCE has continued to conduct the program each year since then. The Adult Education Section of the UBC/CCE, which conducts the program, uses brochures as i t s p r i n c i p a l promotional device. Although the organizers of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c invest much e f f o r t i n t h e i r promotional a c t i v i t i e s annually, enrollments i n the program have experienced a f l u c t u a t i n g h i s t o r y over the l a s t f i v e years, and have d e c l i n e d during the l a s t two years (see Table 7). 100 Table 7 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c Enrollment H i s t o r y 1973-1980 Year Number of E n r o l l e e s 1 973 1 52 1 974 1 97 1 975 1 58 1 976 80 1 977 175 1 978 1 22 . 1 979 97 1980 75 In 1976, the program had 80 e n r o l l e e s , a drop i n enrollment of about 50 percent r e l a t i v e to the f i r s t three years. In 1977, however, the enrollment f i g u r e s rose sharply to 175. The subsequent three years, however, witnessed another downward trend i n the number of e n r o l l e e s with f i g u r e s of 122, 97 and 75 for the years 1978, 1979 and 1980 r e s p e c t i v e l y . The un c e r t a i n t y regarding the number of e n r o l l e e s to be expected i n any given year was noted by the organizers of the program to be of considerable concern to them and p a r t i c u l a r l y so as they considered the prospect of conducting the program i n 1981. The maximum number of "places" a v a i l a b l e was 200, yet, as i l l u s t r a t e d , a ppreciably fewer than 200 101 people attend. Consequently, the planners of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981 embarked on a concerted e f f o r t to improve upon the 1978 to 1980 enrollment f i g u r e s by pursuing a more extensive advertisement p o l i c y than had been followed in previous years. In a d d i t i o n to sending brochures to a l l persons l i s t e d on t h e i r m a i l i n g l i s t , which the promoters i n d i c a t e d had grown i n s i z e r e l a t i v e to the previous years, the programmers employed a d d i t i o n a l promotional techniques such as a d v e r t i s i n g i n j o u r n a l s and newsle t t e r s , and enclo s i n g f l y e r s with the brochures of other program areas w i t h i n the UBC/CCE. I t was a l s o assumed by the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c organizers that word about the program would be disseminated i n other ways such as by resource persons i n other program areas, acquaintances, f r i e n d s and colleagues of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who themselves might have come to know of the program through any of the aforementioned means or as a r e s u l t of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n previous Chautauquas by the P a c i f i c . Program Objectives 1981. As stated i n the brochure mailed to the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s on i t s m a i l i n g l i s t , the organizers of the program st a t e d that the 1981 program was designed for adult educators i n t e r e s t e d i n : - a c q u i r i n g or r e f i n i n g knowledge and s k i l l s to f u r t h e r your development as an educator - a choice among 13 programs, a l l o w i n g you to design a week appropriate to your needs and i n t e r e s t s - resource people s e l e c t e d for t h e i r content and t r a i n i n g e x p e r t i s e - j o i n i n g a v i b r a n t l e a r n i n g community - i n t e r a c t i n g with colleagues from a l l over Canada and the U.S. - recharging your b a t t e r i e s and g i v i n g undivided a t t e n t i o n to your own l e a r n i n g and development - an opportunity to browse i n adult education l i t e r a t u r e in the UBC l i b r a r i e s , i n c l u d i n g the C o o l i e Verner 102 Memorial Reading Room at the Adult Education D i v i s i o n - v i s i t i n g one of the world's most b e a u t i f u l campus s i t e s . (UBC/CCE, p.2, 1981) Workshops Conducted i n 1981. Thirteen workshops were conducted i n 1981. These workshops were: the systematic design and management of i n s t r u c t i o n ; managing the business of continuing education; p o l i s h i n g your t r a i n i n g s k i l l s : for experienced t r a i n e r s ; c o n t i n u i n g education i n the p r o f e s s i o n : a workshop for p r a c t i t i o n e r s ; o r g a n i z a t i o n a l c o n s u l t i n g s k i l l s ; a dult education and p o l i c y ; community development-concepts and t h e o r i e s ; i n s t i t u t i o n a l based l e a r n i n g - o n l y the t i p of the adult l e a r n i n g iceberg?; l i n k i n g s o c i a l a c t i o n , change agents and l e a r n i n g ; developing performance planning, coaching and review s k i l l s i n managers; h o l i s t i c approaches to a d u l t education; c o u n s e l l i n g a d u l t l e a r n e r s and s i g n i f i c a n t developments i n adult l e a r n i n g theory. A d e s c r i p t i o n of the t h i r t e e n workshops, i n c l u d i n g a statement of each workshop's s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e s and a synopsis of the content of each and the time at which each was conducted i s provided in Appendix B. Populat ion The population from which the samples for t h i s study were drawn c o n s i s t e d of approximately 10,000 p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s to the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . These people were included on the m a i l i n g l i s t compiled for the 1981 conference. The m a i l i n g l i s t c o n s i s t e d of: a) P a r t i c i p a n t s i n at l e a s t one of the previous eight Chautauquas by the P a c i f i c ; 1 03 b) People included on the UBC/CCE Adult Education Section regular m a i l i n g l i s t on p r o f e s s i o n a l development; c) Persons l i s t e d i n Community Development Society (CDS) f i l e (800 names) and the N a t i o n a l U n i v e r s i t y Continuing Education A s s o c i a t i o n (NUCEA) f i l e (1,100 names); and d) Groups judged by the coordinator of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c to be engaged in adult education, but who may not designate themselves as such (e.g., audio v i s u a l a i d s t e c h n o l o g i s t s ) . An i n i t i a l d e s c r i p t i o n of the t o t a l population was determined by examining the occupations and addresses l i s t e d for the people on the m a i l i n g l i s t . The examination revealed that the people were mainly p r o f e s s i o n a l s working i n various c o n t i n u i n g education o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The f a c t that they were on the m a i l i n g l i s t was taken as an i n d i c a t i o n that they l i k e l y had a h i s t o r y of u t i l i z i n g c o n t i n u i n g education as a means of achieving t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s . Therefore, these people who were part of a large t a r g e t population of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to a s p e c i f i c educational program to whom brochures have been sent, provided a s u i t a b l e population from which to obtain the samples for t h i s study. Samples Two subpopulations of subjects were sampled. The f i r s t subpopulation c o n s i s t e d of e n r o l l e e s . The second c o n s i s t e d of non-e n r o l l e e s . 1 04 Determination of Sample Size E n r o l l e e s . The e l i g i b l e subjects for t h i s sample c o n s i s t e d of the a n t i c i p a t e d two percent of the population who were expected to have p r e - r e g i s t e r e d for the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Two percent represents a t o t a l of 200 people of the 10,000 contained on the m a i l i n g l i s t . The f i n a l sample included people who had pre-r e g i s t e r e d for the program by June 12, 1981, thus, a l l o w i n g for the m a i l i n g of the instruments to the subjects and for them to respond before coming to the program on June 22. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were mailed to those e n r o l l e e s who had not taken part i n the p i l o t study described e a r l i e r . A l t o g e t h e r , there were 133 such i n d i v i d u a l s . Non-enrollee. The d e s i r e d sample s i z e for non-enrollees was set at 400. This number was determined as f o l l o w s : f i r s t i t was assumed t h a t , although there were 133 persons i n the i n i t i a l sample of e n r o l l e e s , not a l l would complete and return the questionnaires which were to be mailed to them. Taking i n t o account that they had, however, e n r o l l e d f o r the program, i t seemed reasonable to assume a 65 percent r a t e of response. Thus, given the i n i t i a l sample s i z e of 133, the planned sample s i z e for the e n r o l l e e sample was 86. Secondly, i t seemed l i k e l y that for the non-enrollee group a lower rate of response could be expected. This value was set at 22 percent, or approximately one t h i r d of that expected for the e n r o l l e e s . Thus to obtain a sample of non-enrollees equal to the expected s i z e of the e n r o l l e e sample, a sample of 400 non-enrollees was drawn. 105 Sampling Procedures E n r o l l e e s . E n r o l l e e s were not sampled. Questionnaires were mailed to a l l i n d i v i d u a l s when they p r e - r e g i s t e r e d , (See Table 8). Table 8 Stages i n the Mail-out of Questionnaires to E n r o l l e e s DATE MAILING NUMBER NUMBER OF QUESTIONNAIRES MAILED OUT 28-5-81 1 101 1-6-81 2 5 5-6-81 3 1 4 12-6-81 4 1 3 Tota l E n r o l l e e s 1 33 Non-enrollees. Since the m a i l i n g l i s t was organized a l p h a b e t i c a l l y i n paper f i l e s and not computerized, i t was decided to s e l e c t the sample in two stages. Stage 1 corresponded to the s e l e c t i o n of f i l e s , while stage 2 corresponded to the s e l e c t i o n of names w i t h i n the sampled f i l e s . Stage 1. That part of the UBC/CCE m a i l i n g l i s t corresponding to past p a r t i c i p a n t s to Chautauquas by the P a c i f i c was organized i n a l p h a b e t i c a l l y ordered f i l e s . There were two unalphabetized f i l e s corresponding to the CDS and NUCEA f i l e s . A l p h a b e t i c a l sampling was used at stage 1 to s e l e c t a sample of f i l e s . I n i t i a l examination of the f i l e s revealed that f i l e s I , J , Q, and X 1 06 conta ined compara t ive ly fewer names than o t h e r s . For example, f i l e Q conta ined only f i v e names whi le f i l e B conta ined 581 names. Consequently , to mainta in n e a r l y equal s i ze , c l u s t e r s , f i l e s I and J were combined, as were f i l e s Q and R and X and Y. Thus, the t o t a l number of a l h p a b e t i c f i l e s was reduced to 23. From the t o t a l of 25, 10 f i l e s were s e l e c t e d us ing a s imple random sampling without replacement. The s e l e c t e d f i l e s are shown i n Table 9. Table 9 Non-enro l l ee s Sampling Chart NO. FILE NUMBER Of I n d i v i d u a l s % OF 3,297 P r o p o r t i o n of 400 F i n a l Number Sampled 1 Q&R 343 10.40 41 . 60 42 2 K 252 7.64 30.56 31 3 I&J 201 6.09 24.36 24 4 V 56 1 .69 6.76 07 5 W 349 10.58 42.34 42 6 S 530 16.07 64.28 64 7 M 408 12.37 49.48 50 8 B 581 17.62 70.48 70 9 D 296 8.97 35.88 36 1 0 G 281 8.5 34.00 34 TOTAL 10 3297 99.93 399.00 400 Note : Each a l p h a b e t i c f i l e conta ined names and addresses of both i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s . Only i n d i v i d u a l s were sampled. 1 07 Stage 2. The names i n each of the 10 s e l e c t e d f i l e s were then numbered 1, 2, 3...n, where n equalled the t o t a l number i n each f i l e (see Table 9,column 3). Only i n d i v i d u a l s were numbered; i n s t i t u t i o n s were excluded. The sample s i z e for each f i l e was then determined as f o l l o w s : 1) The t o t a l number of i n d i v i d u a l s i n each f i l e was expressed as a percentage of the t o t a l number of i n d i v i d u a l s i n the 10 sampled f i l e s , (Table 9, column 4). 2) The number of subjects to be drawn from each f i l e was set p r o p o r t i o n a l to the percentages computed in step 1 and rounded o f f as shown i n Table 9, column 6. The f i n a l sample s i z e for f i l e M was rounded up to compensate for the downward roundoff of s e v e r a l of the remaining f i l e s . F i l e M was rounded upwards because i t had the highest f r a c t i o n of one out of the other f i l e s which by rounding, were p r e v i o u s l y adjusted downwards ( f i l e s I and J , W and S). A table of random numbers was then used to draw a simple random sample from each f i l e . Instrumentat ion The q u e s t i o n n a i r e used to c o l l e c t data from each of the sampled i n d i v i d u a l s was discussed i n Chapter IV. A copy of the f i n a l instrument i s presented i n Appendix B. 108 Data C o l l e c t ion Questionnaires were mailed to a l l subjects who had e n r o l l e d by June 12, p r i o r to the beginning of the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Four, mailouts r e f l e c t i n g the enrollment on each of four dates (see Table 8) were made. S i m i l a r l y , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were a l s o mailed to the sample of 400 non-enrollees on June 19, at which time i t was assumed that they had made the d e c i s i o n not to e n r o l l i n the 1981 program. Each que s t i o n n a i r e was accomplanied by an in t r o d u c t o r y explanatory l e t t e r in which the purpose of the study was explained and the subject's cooperation sought. As w e l l , an approval l e t t e r from the UBC/CCE signed by i t s D i r e c t o r and the Associate D i r e c t o r of the Adult Education Section was included with each q u e s t i o n n a i r e . To f u r t h e r r e f r e s h the subjects' minds regarding the s p e c i f i c program under c o n s i d e r a t i o n , a copy of the program announcement f l y e r which had e a r l i e r been sent to a l l of them by UBC/CCE, was a l s o enclosed i n each package. A copy of each of the m a t e r i a l s included i n the mailout i s provided i n Appendix B. I t was not p o s s i b l e to complete a follow-up study or send reminder notes f o l l o w i n g the i n i t i a l mailouts because of the i n s i d e p o s t a l workers of Canada s t r i k e , which l a s t e d from June 29 through August 10. This period corresponded to the time during which the sampled i n d i v i d u a l s would have received the f i r s t set of qu e s t i o n n a i r e s , completed and returned them. Reasonable p r e l i m i n a r y data upon which to base a f o l l o w up study were not a v a i l a b l e u n t i l August 24 (two weeks f o l l o w i n g termination of the 109 p o s t a l s t r i k e ) . Because the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c had ended on June 26, i t was f e l t that sending a reminder to e i t h e r groups would be perceived by them as somewhat i r r e l e v a n t . A c c o r d i n g l y , the d e c i s i o n was made not to send follow-up q u e s t i o n n a i r e s to the non-respondents. Data Analyses In t h i s s e c t i o n , the s t r a t e g i e s employed i n the preparation and e d i t i n g the data for analyses as w e l l as the techniques used in the data analyses are discussed. Data Preparation and E d i t i n g As each questionnaire was received i t was checked to determine whether or not a l l i t s s e c t i o n s had been completed by the respondent. Any questionnaire that was incomplete was discarded. The data contained in each questionnaire were coded on a Fortran Coding Form with 100 percent v e r i f i c a t i o n . The data were then keypunched and the keypunched cards v e r i f i e d against the e n t r i e s on the Fortran Coding. A n a l y t i c Techniques D e s c r i p t i o n of Samples. Basic d e s c r i p t i v e frequency t a b u l a t i o n s were computed separately for the e n r o l l e e and non-e n r o l l e e samples on the four socio-demographic v a r i a b l e s as w e l l as the 14 socio-educational v a r i a b l e s (See Appendix B, Qusstionnaire Section 1). These t a b u l a t i o n s were prepared using the SPSS:  Stat i st i c a l Package for the Soc i a l Sc iences (Nie, et al.1975). The r e s u l t i n g information was used to describe and compare the s o c i o -1 10 demographic and educational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees. The comparative a n a l y s i s was f u r t h e r augmented by computing chi-square s t a t i s t i c s . I n t e r n a l Consistency of Expectancy Theory Tests. I n t e r n a l consistency c o e f f i c i e n t s were computed using Hoyt's (1941) analyses of variance for each of the s i x t e s t s (expectancy, valence and importance; i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and importance). The computer program LERTAP (see p.92) was used to execute these analyses. P r e d i c t i v e Accuracies of Models. In a d d i t i o n to e s t a b l i s h i n g the i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c i e s of the t e s t s , the extent to which each of the v a r i a b l e s was c o r r e l a t e d with the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l was a l s o determined. The subprogram SPSS Pearson C o r r e l a t i o n was used to compute zero-order product-moment c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s . S i m i l a r l y , the extent to which a l l of the v a r i a b l e s were c o r r e l a t e d with each other was determined. The SPSS Discriminant subprogram was used to determine which of the models i n v e s t i g a t e d in t h i s study served maximally to d i s c r i m i n a t e between the groups. These were the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model, the instrumental-valence model, the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model and the a d d i t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model (See Table 1). A stepwise s o l u t i o n employing the minimum Wilks' Lambda c r i t e r i a (p < .05) was employed to c o n t r o l the order i n which the v a r i a b l e s were entered or deleted from the a n a l y s i s as a f u n c t i o n of t h e i r r e l a t i v e d i s c r i m i n a t i n g power. As w e l l , the r e s u l t i n g f u n c t i o n s were used to c l a s s i f y the subjects i n t o two groups ( e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees) based on the values obtained 111 by each on the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g f u n c t i o n s that maximized t h e i r d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , and the confusion matrix examined for m i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . The r e s u l t s of these analyses, together with a d e s c r i p t i o n of the f i n a l samples r e a l i z e d are presented i n Chapter VI. 1 12 CHAPTER VI RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The main purpose of the present study was to f i n d out what combination of s e l e c t e d expectancy theory and contextual v a r i a b l e s analysed simultaneously "best" p r e d i c t e d a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s d e c i s i o n regarding enrollment i n a given program. The r e s u l t s are presented and discussed i n t h i s chapter. F i r s t , the r e s u l t s of d e s c r i p t i v e data regarding the response r a t e , socio-demographic and educational c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees, and the r e l i a b i l i t y of the instrument used to measure the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s i n the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models are presented. The next s e c t i o n deals with determining the extent to which a l l the v a r i a b l e s are c o r r e l a t e d with the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l and with each other. This i s followed by the r e s u l t s of the p r i n c i p a l and secondary hypotheses t e s t e d , namely f i n d i n g s regarding the comparative p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the expressive-f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models and f i n d i n g s comparing the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e versus a d d i t i v e forms of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model. The chapter concludes with a summary. Response Rate In t h i s s e c t i o n , the response rates of the e n r o l l e e s and non-e n r o l l e e s are presented. 1 13 E n r o l l e e s ' Response Rate Ninety f i v e (71.4%) of the 133 questionnaires mailed to the subjects i n the e n r o l l e e group were returned. Of t h i s number, 88 (92.6%) were usable. The seven (7.4%) discarded q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were e i t h e r p a r t i a l l y incomplete or t o t a l l y blank. Non-enrollees' Response Rate Each of the 400 randomly sampled non-enrollees was mailed a questionnaire on June 19. As i n d i c a t e d in the preceding chapter, the reason for sampling a l a r g e r number of non-enrollees than e n r o l l e e s (400 versus 133) was to ensure t h a t , i n l i g h t of an expected lower response r a t e , a s u f f i c i e n t number of responses from the non-enrollee group would be obtained to make comparative analyses of the two groups s t a t i s t i c a l l y p o s s i b l e and meaningful. Consequently, i t was decided that when 88 useable non-enrollee q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were received (the same number as the useable e n r o l l e e s ' q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ) , data c o l l e c t i o n would be stopped. F i f t y - f i v e (14.3%) of the questionnaires were received p r i o r to the Canadian p o s t a l s t r i k e . A f u r t h e r 15 (36%) were returned undelivered which reduced the p o t e n t i a l sample s i z e to 385. During the s t r i k e , four more (1.0%) responses were returned by hand. Between the end of the s t r i k e and the termination of the data c o l l e c t i o n on August 26 an a d d i t i o n a l 55 (14.3%) responses were received. Thus, the t o t a l number of returned questionnaires was 114 (29.6%). Each of the 114 questionnaires was examined as i t was received to determine whether or not a l l s e c t i o n s were c o r r e c t l y completed; 88 were useable. The remaining 26 (22.8%) that were 1 1 4 considered non-useable had the f o l l o w i n g problems: 23 were only p a r t i a l l y completed and three had been returned blank. Soc io-demographic and Educat i o n a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s  of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees The frequency and percentages for each of the s o c i o -demographic and educational v a r i a b l e s considered are presented in Table 10 separately for the e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees. C h i -square a n a l y s i s was performed to determine whether or not there were any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s (p<.05) between the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the samples on the v a r i a b l e s . Table 10 Socio-demographic and Educational C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ENROLLEES NON-EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLEES (n = l 38) (n = 88) Freq. % Freq. % AGE 20-24 2 2.2 0 0.0 25-29 8 9.1 9 10.1 30-34 22 25.0 19 21.6 35-39 22 25.0 18 20.4 40-44 1 1 12.6 12 13.5 45-49 6 6.8 10 11.4 50-54 1 0 11.2 1 1 12.4 55-59 5 5.6 5 5.6 60-64 2 2.2 3 3.4 65 or more 0 0.0 1 1 . 1 GENDER Men 37 42.0 48 54.5 Women 51 58.0 40 45.5 SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PROGRAM Journal Not Checked 88 100.0 87 98.9 Checked 0 0.0 1 1 . 1 Newsletter Not Checked 84 95.5 85 96.6 Checked 4 4.5 3 3.4 Resource Person Not Checked 83 94.3 86 97.7 Checked 5 5.7 2 2.3 F l y e r Not Checked 80 90.9 77 87.5 Checked 8 9.1 1 1 12.5 Table 10 -- Continued SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND ENROLLEES NON-EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLEES (n = { 38) (n = { 38) Freq. % Freq. % SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PROGRAM Mailed Brochure Not Checked 32 36. 4 20 22.7 * Checked 56 63. 6 68 77.3 Aquaintance Not Checked 75 85. 2 80 90.9 Checked 1 3 14. 8 8 9. 1 Fr i e n d Not Checked 86 97. 7 84 95.5 Checked 2 2. 3 4 4.5 Colleague Not Checked 70 79. 5 85 96.6 * Checked 18 20. 5 3 3.4 Can't Remember Not Checked 88 1 00. 0 86 97.7 Checked 0 0. 0 2 2.3 Others Not Checked 88 1 00. 0 88 100.0 Checked 0 0. 0 0 0.0 Highest Educational Quali f i c a t ion Others 0 0. 0 0 0.0 No Formal Q u a l i f i c a t i o n 0 0. 0 0 0.0 High School Graduation 3 3. 4 3 3.4 Other T e r t i a r y Qual. 1 3 14. 8 9 10.2 P a r t i a l U n i v e r s i t y 5 5. 7 12 13.6 U n i v e r s i t y Degree 1 6 18. 2 27 30.7 U n i v e r s i t y Degree Plus 51 58. 0 37 42.0 1 17 Table 10 — Continued SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND EDUCATIONAL VARIABLE ENROLLI (n = 8< SES 3) NON-ENROLI (n = 8< JEES 3) Freq. % Freq. % Time Since Last Part i c ipat ion Don't Know 0 0. 0 1 1 . 1 30 Plus 0 0. 0 0 0.0 21 to 30 Years 0 0. 0 1 1 . 1 11 to 20 Years 0 0. 0 1 1 . 1 6 to 10 Years 3 3. 4 4 4.5 3 to 5 Years 7 8. 0 12 13.6 1 to 2 Years 1 7 19. 3 29 33.0 Less Than 1 Year 61 69. 3 40 45.5 Employment Status Unemployed 2 2. 3 1 1 . 1 Self-employed 7 8. 0 3 3.4 Employed by Organization 79 89. 8 84 95.5 Having Friends With Whom To Discuss P a r t i c i p a t i o n In Chautauqua No 80 90. 9 35 39.8 * Yes 8 9. 1 53 60.2 Friends' Influence On General Decision Making Missing 0 0. 0 3 3.4 No 20 22. 7 33 37.5 Yes 68 77. 3 52 59. 1 Having Close Contact With Family Members No 75 85. 2 45 51.1 Yes 1 3 14. 8 43 48.9 Family Influence On General Decision Making Missing 0 0. 0 5 5.7 No 36 40. 9 34 38.6 Yes 52 59. 1 49 55.7 Note: Chi square analyses were performed using those c e l l s for which the expected c e l l frequency exceeded the recommended minimum value of 10 when the degrees of freedom was one and f i v e where the degrees of freedom was greater. * p < .05 118 Socio-demoqraphic C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s The Socio-demographic v a r i a b l e s considered were age, gender, educational background and employment s t a t u s . Age. Most of the i n d i v i d u a l s i n each of the groups ( e n r o l l e e s 81% and non-enrollees 79%) c l u s t e r e d w i t h i n the age range of 30-54 years. There was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e found between the age d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the samples. Gender. The e n r o l l e e s sampled c o n s i s t e d of 37 (42.0%) men and 51 (58.0%) women. The non-enrollee group had 48 (54.5%) men and 40 (45.5%) women. This d i f f e r e n c e i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n of gender between the groups was not s i g n i f i c a n t . Educational background. The majo r i t y of the i n d i v i d u a l s i n each group ( e n r o l l e e s 82% and non-enrollees 86%) had attempted some form of u n i v e r s i t y education or had more than a u n i v e r s i t y degree. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between the groups on t h e i r educational background. Employment s t a t u s . The respondents i n each group ( e n r o l l e e s 90% and non-enrollees 96%) were mostly p r o f e s s i o n a l s employed by o r g a n i z a t i o n s . S i m i l a r l y , there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e found between the groups regarding t h e i r r e l a t i v e employment s t a t u s . Taken together, there were no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between the groups regarding the socio-demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s considered. Soc i o - e d u c a t i o n a l Character i st i e s The soc i o - e d u c a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s considered were source of 1 19 knowledge about the program, recency of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n educational programs, d i s c u s s i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n with f r i e n d s , f r i e n d s i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n s , contact with family and inf l u e n c e of family on d e c i s i o n s . Source of Knowledge About Program. Ten a l t e r n a t i v e s were provided regarding the sources of knowledge about Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Respondents were requested to check those which were a p p l i c a b l e to them. Eight of the sources ( j o u r n a l , newsletter, resource person, f l y e r , mailed brochure, acquaintance, f r i e n d and colleague) had been used by the organizers of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c to disseminate information about the program. Two other a l t e r n a t i v e s , can't remember and others, were included to provide choices for those who might have forgotten how they heard of the program, or the means by which they had learned about i t had not been i d e n t i f i e d as an a l t e r n a t i v e . The f i n d i n g s regarding each of these sources were presented in Table 10. Chi-square a n a l y s i s revealed that the e n r o l l e e s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p<.05) from the non-enrollees for mailed brochure (63.6% versus 77.3%) and colleague (20.5% versus 3.4%). The 32 (36.4%) e n r o l l e e s who reported not having received mailed brochures heard of the program through the f o l l o w i n g sources: colleague, acquaintance, f l y e r , resource person, newsletter and f r i e n d s (see Table 10). Furthermore, given that the addresses used to mail the qu e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r the present study were the same as those used to mail the brochures, i t was suspected that those respondents might have forgotten they had received brochures e a r l i e r . . Recency of Part i c i pat i o n . As was expected, given the 120 respondents' educational background and the f a c t that most of the respondents were working in educational s e t t i n g s , the proportion of the subjects who had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n an educational program in the previous two years was high: 78 (88.6%) of the e n r o l l e e s and 69 (78.5%) of the non-enrollees. Chi-square a n a l y s i s performed on these data revealed that recency of p a r t i c i p a t i o n was a significant(p<0.05) c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s . This f i n d i n g agrees with those p r e v i o u s l y reported i n the adult education l i t e r a t u r e that recency of previous p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an educational program i s a good i n d i c a t o r of who i s l i k e l y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a future program. Discussing Part i c i pat ion with F r i e n d s . The question posed to the respondents was "Do you have f r i e n d s with whom you might di s c u s s p a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua?" The o v e r a l l responses of the groups would seem to suggest that while they do have f r i e n d s , which i s evident from the next question about having f r i e n d s that i n f l u e n c e t h e i r d e c i s i o n , these f r i e n d s were not of the sort with whom they normally discuss whether or not to p a r t i c i p a t e i n an educational program such as Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . This d i s p o s i t i o n was more pronounced among the e n r o l l e e s (91%) as against (40%) of the non-enrollees (p<0.05). Fr iend's Influence on Dec i s i o n . A d i f f e r e n t response pattern was found to be operating when respondents were asked whether or not they had f r i e n d s who g e n e r a l l y i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r d e c i s i o n s . Approximately 60 percent of the non-enrollees reported that they were inf l u e n c e d by t h e i r f r i e n d s not only when they were co n s i d e r i n g p a r t i c i p a t i n g in an educational program, but a l s o 121 g e n e r a l l y i n other s i t u a t i o n s that c a l l e d f or d e c i s i o n making. Although 91 percent of the e n r o l l e e s reported that they would l i k e l y not discuss p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c with t h e i r f r i e n d s , most (77.3%) were g e n e r a l l y open to being influenced by t h e i r f r i e n d s on broader s i t u a t i o n s that c a l l e d for d e c i s i o n making. This d i f f e r e n c e between the two groups was s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05). Family Contact. The question posed was "Do you have close contact with family members (e.g., spouse, brothers, c h i l d r e n , parents, aunts, uncles, e t c . ) ? " For e n r o l l e e s 85.2% reported not having c l o s e contact with members of t h e i r f a m i l i e s . This f i n d i n g , while i t may appear odd, could be seen as a r e f l e c t i o n of the urbanized nature of the communities i n which the respondents l i v e d and worked where the dynamics of the extended family are l e s s in operation compared to people l i v i n g i n r u r a l communities. This inference i s based on the f a c t that the examination of the addresses of the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s revealed that they were r e s i d i n g or working in urban centres such as Calgary, H a l i f a x , New York, Sydney-Australia, Toronto, Vancouver and V i c t o r i a . As with t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p with t h e i r f r i e n d s , the e n r o l l e e s appeared to be more independent. This r e l a t i v e l y greater independence e x h i b i t e d by the e n r o l l e e s (85.2%) v i s - a - v i s the non-enrollees (51.1%) was found to be s i g n i f i c a n t (p < 0.05). Summary. The a n a l y s i s of the d i f f e r e n c e s between the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees on the s o c i o -demographic and educational v a r i a b l e s revealed that age, gender, 1 22 educational background and employment status were not s i g n i f i c a n t . The mailed brochure was the p r i n c i p a l source through which the respondents had heard of the program. On the whole, i t would appear that the e n r o l l e e s were more independent than the non-e n r o l l e e s which regard to t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s with s i g n f i c a n t others and the amount of i n f l u e n c e such persons had on t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. R e l i a b i l i t y of the Instruments used to Measure the Expectancy  V a r i a b l e s i n the Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Models Separate item analyses were completed for the e n r o l l e e and non-enrollee groups to determine the i n t e r n a l consistency of the t e s t s used to measure the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s included i n the four models subsequently t e s t e d . The r e s u l t s of these analyses are presented i n Table 11. 1 23 Table 1 1 Means, Standard D e v i a t i o n s , and R e l i a b i l i t i e s of the Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s in the Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Models E n r o l l e e Non-enrollee Number (n=88) • (n=88) Model/Test of Mean I n t e r n a l Mean I n t e r n a l i terns (SD) Consistency (SD) Consistency Expectancy * 10 38. 1 9 .79 a 30.20 .89 a (6.81 ) (8.55) Valence * 1 0 38.40 .79 31 .05 .92 (5.28) (7.86) Importance * 1 0 29.20 .73 20.91 .92 (5.95) (9.08) I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y * 1 0 28.51 .81 22.23 .93 (6.33) (8.44) Valence * 1 0 37.05 .75 30.02 .94 (4.45) (7.55) Importance * 1 0 30.98 .79 19.88 .94 (6.65) i (9.50) * (p< .05) a = Hoyt's Estimate of R e l i a b i l i t y (1941) As shown i n Table 11, the means of the e n r o l l e e sample exceeded the corresponding non-enrollee means. H o t e l l i n g ' s T 2 followed by c o n s t r u c t i o n of Roy-Bose simultaneous confidence i n t e r v a l s (Morrison,1976; pp. 136-141) revealed that these d i f f e r e n c e s were s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05) on each v a r i a b l e . The corresponding t e s t of homogeneity of variance-covariance was l i k e w i s e s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05). Consequently, item analyses were c a r r i e d out separately for the two samples. Examination of the p o i n t - b i s e r i a l c o r r e l a t i o n s revealed that for each item i n each t e s t the c o r r e l a t i o n s were p o s i t i v e . The i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c i e s shown i n Table 11, range from .73 to .81 i n the e n r o l l e e sample, and from .89 to .94 for the non-enrollees. 1 24 The d i f f e r e n c e s between corresponding c o e f f i c i e n t s was a t t r i b u t a b l e to the d i f f e r e n c e s i n v a r i a b i l i t y ( A l l e n and Yen,1979 p.194-196). Comparative P r e d i c t i v e Accuracies of the Expressive,Instrumental  and the M u l t i p i i c a t i v e l y Combined Expressive-Force and  Instrumental-Valence Models The c e n t r a l concern of t h i s study was to determine what combination of s e l e c t e d expectancy theory and personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s considered simultaneously best d i s c r i m i n a t e d e n r o l l e e s from non-enrollees. The subprogram Discriminant of the SPSS computer package was used to t e s t the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the proposed hypothesized r e l a t i o n s h i p s summarised i n Table 1 and to determine i f a l l of the v a r i a b l e s included i n each model were necessary. The f i r s t step i n t h i s a n a l y s i s was to examine the c o r r e l a t i o n between the component v a r i a b l e s and enrollment d e c i s i o n making and the c o r r e l a t i o n among the component v a r i a b l e s themselves. Zero Order C o r r e l a t i o n s The Pearson product-moment c o r r e l a t i o n between each of the p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s and the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l are reported i n Table 12. 125 Table 12 M u l t i p l e and Zero Order C o r r e l a t i o n s between P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s and D e c i s i o n to E n r o l l (n = 176) P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s Decision to E n r o l l E 0.46 * VI 0.48 * Impi 0.48 * I 0.39 * V2 0.50 * Imp2 0.56 * E E Imp2xIxV2 0.53 * E Imp2xIxV2 0.55 * EXfMCf 0.05 EXfrMCfr 0.12 EXeMCe 0.60 * EEelnf 0.38 * EEexpInf 0.36 * STInf 0.66 * E Imp1xExV1 0.54 * * Note: p < 0.05 E V1 Imp1 I V2 Imp2 E E Imp2xIxV2 E Imp2xIxV2 EXfMCf = Expectancy; = Expectancy valence; = Expectancy importance; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y ; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y importance; = Score of expectancy x the sum of importance x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence = Score of the sum of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y importance x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence = Perceived expectations of family x 126 motivation to comply; EXfrMCfr = Perceived expectations of f r i e n d s x motivation to comply; EXeMCe = Perceived expectations of employer x motivation to comply; EEelnf = Educational e f f i c a c y x i n f l u e n c e ; EEexpInf = Educational e f f i c a c y expectations x i n f l u e n c e ; STInf = S u i t a b i l i t y of time x i n f l u e n c e ; and I Imp1xExV1 = Score of the sum of expectancy importance x expectancy x expectancy valence From Table 12 i t i s evident that a l l but two of the p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s , perceived expectations of family m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply (EXfMCf) and perceived expectations of f r i e n d s m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply (EXfrMCfr), c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p < .05) with the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . The highest s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n was observed for s u i t a b i l i t y of time m u l t i p l i e d by in f l u e n c e (STInf) and the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; and perceived expectations of family m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply (EXfMCf) had the lowest s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n with the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among the p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s are shown in Table 13. The t a b l e s of means and standard d e v i a t i o n s are contained i n Table A, Appendix C. 121 Table K3 Correlations between the Predictor Variables F 1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 F 1 1 F 12 F 13 F14 F 15 F 1 1 .00 F2 0 . 73 1 .00 F3 0 . 55 0 . 56 1 .00 F4 0 . 20 0. . 25 0 . 35 1 .00 F5 O . 44 0 . 45 0 . 4 1 0 .44 1 .00 F6 .0. .42 0. . 46 0 . 58 0 . 58 0 . 57 1 .00 F7 0. . 58 0. . 57 0 . 56 0. . 72 0 .65 0 . 83 1 .00 F8 0. . 38 0. .45 0 . 53 0. . 78 0. 67 0 .87 0 . 95 1 . .00 F9 -0. . 13 -o. 14 -0 . 17 -o. .04 -0. .06 -0 .06 -0 .09 -0 .07 1 .00 F 10 -0. .06 -0. 05 -0. .04 -0. 00 -0. 02 0. .05 0. .08 0. .08 0. . 15 1 .00 F 1 1 -o. . 1 1 -0. 06 -0. .07 0, .01 0. 01 0. .06 0. .03 0. 07 0. . 26 0. . 15 1 . 00 F 12 0. 08 0. 1 1 0. 14 0. . 23 0. 10 0. . 19 0. . 22 0. 23 0. .21 0. 22 0 . 14 1 . 00 F 13 -0. 03 -0. 01 0. 02 0. . 13 0. 09 0. 04 0. 10 0. 12 0. 13 0. . 12 0 .07 0. . 38 1 . 00 F 14 0. 2 1 0. 19 0. 19 0. 18 0. 04 0. 21 0. 28 0. 24 0. 07 0. 05 0. .09 0. 17 0. 13 F 15 0. 70 0. 73 0. 84 0. 39 0. 49 0. 60 0. 68 0. 59 -0. 13 -0. 03 -0. .09 0. 1 1 0. 04 1 .00 0.18 1 .00 where 1 = Expectancy (E); 2 = Expectancy valence (V1); 3 = Expectancy importance (Imp1); 4 = Instrumentality (I); 5 = Instrumentality valence (V2); 6 = Instrumentality importance (Imp2); 7 = Score of expectancy x the sum of importance x instrumentality x instrumentality valence ( E E Imp2xIxV2); 8 = Score of the sum of instrumentality importance x instrumentality x instrumentality valence ( I Imp2xIxV2); 9 = Perceived expectation of family x motivation to comply (EXfMCf); 10 = Perceived expectation of freinds x motivation to comply (EXfrMCfr); 11 = Perceived expectation of employer x motivation to comply (EXeMCe); 12 = Educational e f f i c a c y x influence (EEelnf); 13 = Educational e f f i c a c y expectations x influence (EEexpInf) 14 = S u i t a b i l i t y of time x influence (STInf); and 15 = Score of the sum of expectancy importance x expectancy x expectancy valence ( t Imp1xExV1). 128 I t i s apparent from Table 13 that the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among the products of the s i x doublets of the s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s are low: perceived expectations of family and motivation to comply (ExfMCf); perceived expectations of f r i e n d s and motivation to comply (ExfMCfr); perceived expectations of employer and motivation to comply (EXeMCe); educational e f f i c a c y and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ( E E e l n f ) ; educational e f f i c a c y expectations and in f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (EXexpInf); and s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). S i m i l a r l y , the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between these v a r i a b l e s and the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s : expectancy (E), expectancy valence (V1), expectancy importance (Impl); i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , instrumental valence (V2), instrumental importance (Imp2) are comparatively lower than those among the various combinations of the components of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s . Among the contextual v a r i a b l e s , the highest i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n (.38) was between EEelnf and EEexpInf, while the highest i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n (.28) between the contextual v a r i a b l e s and the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s was between STInf and EEImp2xIxV2. The r e s u l t s revealed that the personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s were in general d i s t i n c t from the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s . The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between the same components of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s and t h e i r various combinations were e s p e c i a l l y high, ranging from .70 between E and I ExImp1xV1 to .95 between EEImp2xIxV2 and EImp2xIxV2. The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among the separate components of the 129 expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s (E,V1,Imp1,I,V2 and Imp2) were, i n comparison to those among them and the v a r i o u s combinations of the same v a r i a b l e s , moderate (see Table 13). In t h i s regard, the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s ranged from .44 between I and V2 to .73 between E and V1. S i m i l a r l y , the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s among the separate components of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s were in general moderate, ranging from .20 between E and I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y to .58 between Imp1 and Imp2 as w e l l as between I and V2. The comparatively higher i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n among the v a r i o u s forms of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s v i s - a - v i s the c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e s i s to be expected given that the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s are the same v a r i a b l e s mathematically combined i n v a r i o u s forms ( a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) . F o l l o w i n g next are the r e s u l t s of the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n analyses using a l l the v a r i a b l e s (See Table 13) simultaneously as they r e l a t e d to the v a r i o u s hypothesized r e l a t i o n s h i p s (See Table 1 ) . D i s c r i m i n a n t Function Analyses To f u r t h e r c l a r i f y the r e l a t i o n s h i p s among the v a r i a b l e s r e p o r t e d i n Tables 12 and 13 and to t e s t the main hypothesis that the p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c i e s of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , i n s t r u m e n t a l -valence, and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and in s t r u m e n t a l - v a l e n c e models are equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program, a s e r i e s of d i s c r i m i n a n t analyses were performed. The corresponding r e s u l t s are re p o r t e d i n t h i s s u b s e c t i o n s e p a r a t e l y for each model t e s t e d . T h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n i s then followed by a summary. 1 30 The three models (see Table 1) were made up as f o l l o w s : (1) the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model (the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by valence), (2) the instrumental-valence model (the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence), and (3) the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined exp r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model (expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence). In each case, the terms perceived expectations of f r i e n d s m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f r i e n d s ; perceived expectations of family m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f a m i l y ; perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by motivation to comply with perceived expectations of employer; educational e f f i c a c y m u l t i p l i e d by i n f l u e n c e of educational e f f i c a c y ; educational e f f i c a c y expectations m u l t i p l i e d by i n f l u e n c e of educational e f f i c a c y expectations; and s u i t a b i l i t y of time m u l t i p l i e d by i n f l u e n c e of s u i t a b i l i t y of time were included i n the analyses. Expressive-Force Model The r e s u l t s for the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model are presented i n Table 14. The d i s c r i m i n a t i n g v a r i a b l e s are l i s t e d i n the order i n which they q u a l i f i e d for i n c l u s i o n i n the f u n c t i o n . For each v a r i a b l e , the F value to enter at the stage i t e i t h e r entered (the f i r s t three l i s t e d v a r i a b l e s ) or at the termination of the analyses ( f o r the l a s t four l i s t e d v a r i a b l e s ) , the value of Wilk's Lambda at each step and the f i n a l standardized d i s c r i m i n a n t weights for 131 the entered v a r i a b l e s are shown. Table 14 Summary S t a t i s t i c s D iscriminant Function A n a l y s i s : Expressive-Force Model V a r i a b l e s i n Order of Entry F. to Enter Wilks' Lambda Coef f i c ient STInf 132.69 * 0.57 0.57 EXeMCe 103.78 * 0.45 0.59 E Imp1xExV1 87.57 * 0.40 0.47 V a r i a b l e s not i n the A n a l y s i s A f t e r Step 3 EXfrMCfr 0.97 EXfMCf 0.20 EEelnf 1.01 EEexpInf 3.10 T * p< .05 The stepwise a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s . of the seven v a r i a b l e s of the ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model r e s u l t e d in the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (p<.05). These three v a r i a b l e s were i n t h e i r order of entry: ( i ) The s u i t a b i l i t y of time i n which a program was scheduled m u l t i p l i e d by the inf l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). ( i i ) The perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply (ExeMCe). 1 32 ( i i i ) The expre s s i v e - f o r c e score c o n s i s t i n g of the sum of the expectation that p a r t i c i p a t i o n would r e s u l t i n the achievement of some o b j e c t i v e s while p a r t i c i p a t i n g m u l t i p l i e d by the importance of achieving those o b j e c t i v e s m u l t i p l i e d by the d e s i r a b i l i t y of achieving the o b j e c t i v e s ( E ImplxExVl). Together, the three v a r i a b l e s accounted for 30% of the variance. Wilk's Lambda at the t h i r d stage was 0.40. The F r a t i o s to enter for the remaining four v a r i a b l e s (see Table 14) were not s i g n i f i c a n t . Consequently, the f u l l e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model with seven terms (see Table 1) was not necessary; instead a shortened model was r e a l i z e d . Written i n standardized score form, the model was: .47 E ImplxExV1+.59 EXeMCe+.57 STInf. Examination of the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between a l l of the v a r i a b l e s and d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (See Table 12) revealed that the v a r i a b l e s EXfrMCfr and EXfMCf, which were among the four v a r i a b l e s that f a i l e d to enter the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n , d i d not c o r r e l a t e with d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . Although the other two v a r i a b l e s , EEelnf and EEexpInf, were s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d with d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l , t h e i r r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s when analysed simultaneously with the three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s were reduced a f t e r the s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n . Thus, a more parsimonious, three term model was r e a l i z e d . Using the shortened model, the p r e d i c t e d group memberships for the samples were computed. The r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s are di s p l a y e d i n Table 15. 133 Table 15 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees Based on Time, Employer and the Expressive-Force Score: Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s ACTUAL GROUP NUMBER OF CASES PREDICTED GRC )UP MEMBERSHIP ENROLLEE NON-ENROLLEE E n r o l l e e 88 74 (84.1%) 14 (15.9%) Non-enrollee 88 7 (8.0%) 81 (92.0%) Percent of cases c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d : 88.1% Together the o v e r a l l p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the reduced expressive-force model was 88.1%. On the bases of the three s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s , 84.1% of the e n r o l l e e s , were c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d , while s l i g h t l y more non-enrollees, 92.0%, were c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d . Instrumental-Valence Model The r e s u l t of the a n a l y s i s of the seven v a r i a b l e s of the instrumental-valence model are presented i n Tables 16 and 17. Shown i n Table 16 are the d i s c r i m i n a t i n g v a r i a b l e s that q u a l i f i e d for i n c l u s i o n i n the f u n c t i o n , the F values to enter, Wilks' Lambda 134 and the standardized d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s . Table 16 Summary S t a t i s t i c s D iscriminant Function A n a l y s i s : Instrumental-Valence Model V a r i a b l e s In Order of Entry F. to Enter Wilks' Lambda Coef f i c ient STInf 132.69 * 0.57 0.60 EXeMCe 103.78 * 0.45 0.55 I Imp2xIxV2 79.16 * 0.42 0.37 V a r i a b l e s not in the A n a l y s i s A f t e r Step 3 ExfrMCfr 1 .51 ExfMCf 0.24 EEelnf 0.71 EEexpInf 2.80 * p< .05 As shown in Table 16, the simultaneous a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of the seven v a r i a b l e s of the instrumental-valence model r e s u l t e d again i n the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (p<.05). These three v a r i a b l e s , i n the order of entry, were: ( i ) The s u i t a b i l i t y of time i n which a program was scheduled m u l t i p l i e d by the in f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). ( i i ) The perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply (ExeMCe). 1 35 ( i i i ) The instrumental-valence score c o n s i s t i n g of the sum of the expectation that p a r t i c i p a t i o n would be instrumental i n achieving o b j e c t i v e s l a t e r m u l t i p l i e d by the importance of achieving those o b j e c t i v e s m u l t i p l i e d by the d e s i r a b i l i t y of achieving the o b j e c t i v e s ( E Imp2xIxV2). Together, the three p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s accounted for 27% of the varian c e . Wilks' Lambda at the t h i r d stage was 0.42. The F r a t i o s to enter for the remaining four v a r i a b l e s (see Table 16) were not s i g n i f i c a n t . A c c o r d i n g l y , the f u l l instrumental-valence model with seven terms (see Table 1) was not necessary. Written i n standardized score form, the shortened model was: .37 E Imp2xExV2+.55 EXeMCe+.60 STInf. The examination of the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between a l l of the v a r i a b l e s and d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (see Table 12) revealed as already i n d i c a t e d , that the v a r i a b l e s EXfrMCfr and EXfMCf, which were among the four v a r i a b l e s that f a i l e d to enter the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n , d i d not c o r r e l a t e with d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . Although the other two v a r i a b l e s , EEelnf and EEexpInf, were s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p<.05) c o r r e l a t e d with the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l , t h e i r r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the p r e d i c t i o n equation when analysed simultaneously with the three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (see Table 16) were depressed a f t e r the s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n . Using the shortened model, the pr e d i c t e d group memberships for the samples were computed. The r e s u l t s of t h i s a n a l y s i s are 136 presented i n Table 17. Table 17 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees Based on Time, Employer and the Instrumental-Valence Score: Expectancy Theory V a r i a b l e s ACTUAL GROUP NUMBER OF CASES PREDICTED GRC )UP MEMBERSHIP ENROLLEE NON-ENROLLEE E n r o l l e e 88 74 (84.1%) 14 (15.9%) Non-enrollee 88 7 (8.0%) 81 (92.0%) Percent of ca: ;es c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d : 88.1% Table 17 shows that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the shortened model was 88.1%. For the e n r o l l e e s , 84.1% were c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d , while s l i g h t l y more non-enrollees, 92.0% were i d e n t i f i e d . M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model The simultaneous a n a l y s i s of the score of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined components of the exp r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-1 37 valence model (see Table 1) y i e l d e d the summary r e s u l t s presented in Table 18. Table 18 Summary S t a t i s t i c s Discriminant Function A n a l y s i s : M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model V a r i a b l e s In Order of Entry F. to Enter Wilks' Lambda Coef f i c ient STInf 132.69 * 0.57 0.60 EXeMCe 103.78 * 0.45 0.57 E E Imp2xIxV2 77.65 * 0.42 0.35 V a r i a b l e s not i n the A n a l y s i s A f t e r Step 3 ExfrMCfr 1 . 48 ExfMCf 0.23 EEelnf 0.85 EEexpInf 3.18 T * p< .05 As with the two preceding models, the stepwise a n a l y s i s of the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of the seven v a r i a b l e s of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined force and valence model r e s u l t e d i n the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (p< .05). These three v a r i a b l e s i n the order of entry were: ( i ) The s u i t a b i l i t y of time i n which a program was scheduled m u l t i p l i e d by the in f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). ( i i ) The perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply (ExeMCe). 138 ( i i i ) The score of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined expectancy v a r i a b l e s of the expres s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model c o n s i s t i n g of expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence (E E Imp2xIxV2). Together, the c o e f f i c i e n t s of the three p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s (see Table 18) accounted for 27% of the variance. Wilks' Lambda at the t h i r d stage was 0.42. The F r a t i o s to enter for remaining four v a r i a b l e s (see Table 18) were not s i g n i f i c a n t . Consequently, the f u l l m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined exp r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model with seven terms (see Table 1) was r e j e c t e d i n favour of the shortened model. Stated i n standardized score form, the model was: .35 E E Imp2xlxV2+.57 EXeMCe+.60 STInf. Again, examination of the i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between a l l of the v a r i a b l e s and d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (see Table 12) revealed that the v a r i a b l e s EXfrMCfr and EXfMCf, which were among the four v a r i a b l e s that f a i l e d to enter the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n , d i d not c o r r e l a t e with d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . Although the other two v a r i a b l e s , EEelnf and Eexplnf, were s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d with d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l , t h e i r r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s when analysed simultaneously with the three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s (see Table 18) were reduced a f t e r the s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n . Using the shortened model, the o v e r a l l accuracy of p r e d i c t i o n of group membership was 88.6% (see Table 19). 1 39 Table 19 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees Based on Time, Employer and the Score of the M u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y Combined Expectancy V a r i a b l e s of the Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model ACTUAL GROUP NUMBER OF CASES PREDICTED GRC )UP MEMBERSHIP ENROLLEE NON-ENROLLEE E n r o l l e e 88 75 (85.2%) 13 (14.8%) Non-enrollee 88 7 (8.0%) 81 (92.0%) Percent of ca: 5es c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d : 88.6% On the bases of the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05) v a r i a b l e s (see Table 18), 85.2% of the e n r o l l e e s and 92.0% of the non-enrollees were c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d . The hypothesis tested was that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models were equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program. The hypothesis was supported. 1 40 Summary. Each of the three po s t u l a t e d models had seven v a r i a b l e s (see Table 1). The stepwise analyses of the component v a r i a b l e s of each model revealed that i n each case there were three s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05) p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s (see Tables 14, 16 and 18). For each of the three models, the f i r s t two v a r i a b l e s to enter the d i s c r i m i n a n t function were: (1) the product of s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf), and (2) perceived expectations of employer and motivation to comply (ExeMCe). S i m i l a r l y , with each of the three models, the score derived from the the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the type of o b j e c t i v e s (expressive or i n s t r u m e n t a l ) , the importance and d e s i r a b i l i t y of those o b j e c t i v e s entered the analyses at the t h i r d stage. Based on the three s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s for each model, the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of both the expre s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models, was 88.1%, and for the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model 88.6% (a n e g l i g i b l e d i f f e r e n c e ) . Thus i t was concluded that the three truncated models were e q u a l l y e f f e c t i v e i n d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees. P r e d i c t ive Accurac ies of the A d d i t i v e versus Mult i p l i c a t ive Forms  of the Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-VaIence Model The secondary hypothesis tested was that the p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c i e s of the a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model are equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program. The p r i n c i p a l hypothesis already t e s t e d compared the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , 141 instrumental-valence, and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined expressive-force and instrumental-valence model. The r e s u l t s of the analyses showed that the three models possessed the same p r e d i c t i v e accuracy. Therefore, to compare the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e versus the a d d i t i v e forms, i t was f e l t that i t was not necessary to repeat the computations for a l l three models. Consequently, only the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined expressive-force and instrumental-valence model was contrasted with i t s a d d i t i v e v a r i a n t . The hypothesis that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model are equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making in a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program was supported. The analyses (see Appendix D) revealed that for each model, three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n . In each case, the f o l l o w i n g two contextual v a r i a b l e s were again the f i r s t to enter: ( i ) The s u i t a b i l i t y of time i n which a program was scheduled m u l t i p l i e d by the i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l (STInf). ( i i ) The perceived expectations of employer m u l t i p l i e d by the motivation to comply (ExeMCe). These two v a r i a b l e s were followed by valence (V) for the a d d i t i v e model; and the score of the expectancy v a r i a b l e s of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined components of the ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model c o n s i s t i n g of expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by 1 42 valence (EEImp2xIxV2) for the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e model (see Tables B,C,D and E, Appendix D). Together the three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s of the shortened a d d i t i v e model accounted for 30% of the variance, while those of the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e model accounted for 27%. Using the shortened v e r s i o n of each of the models, i t was revealed that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies were very nearly equal: 89.2% and 88.6% r e s p e c t i v e l y for the a d d i t i v e and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e models. Consequently, there appeared to be no d i f f e r e n t i a l advantage between the a d d i t i v e l y and m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined models. Summary The comparative analyses of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence, and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined expressive-force and instrumental-valence model revealed that they were about equal in d i s c r i m i n a t i n g between e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees. S i m i l a r l y , the d i f f e r e n c e i n p r e d i c t i v e accuracy between the a d d i t i v e versus the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of combining the components of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s revealed that they were a l s o about the same. The analyses f u r t h e r revealed that for a l l four models: three v a r i a b l e s were necessary; the remaining v a r i a b l e s considered i n each model were not s i g n i f i c a n t . In each case, of the three primary p r e d i c t o r s to enter the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n a n a l y s i s , the f i r s t two i n t h e i r order of entry were the product of the s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i n f l u e n c e on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; and 143 perceived expectations of employer and motivation to comply. The p r e d i c t o r score r e a l i z e d from the combination of the f o l l o w i n g expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n i n the t h i r d stage: the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by valence ( e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model), the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence (instrumental-valence model), expectancy m u l t i p l i e d by the sum of importance m u l t i p l i e d by i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y m u l t i p l i e d by valence ( m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model) and valence ( a d d i t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model). The r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that where behavior i s being p r e d i c t e d (e.g. enrollment d e c i s i o n making as indexed by p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n ) and relevant personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s to the context of the study are analysed simultaneously with expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s , the contextual v a r i a b l e s would seem to be b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r s than the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s . This f i n d i n g i s i n agreement with the r e s u l t s reported by previous i n v e s t i g a t o r s ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen, 1973; Parker and Dyer 1976). Furthermore, when the a d d i t i v e versus the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the combined components of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model (Parker and Dyer, 1976) were compared, i t was valence (the respondents' d e s i r e to achieve the o b j e c t i v e s ) that entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t a n a l y s i s rather than importance (the p r i o r i t y the respondents placed on achieving the o b j e c t i v e s ) . In t h i s regard t h e r e f o r e , the respondents in t h i s study would seem to have placed more s i g n i f i c a n c e on the d e s i r a b i l i t y of a c hieving 1 44 given o b j e c t i v e s rather than the importance of achieving those object i v e s . 1 45 CHAPTER VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS  AND IMPLICATIONS Every i n d i v i d u a l at some point i n h i s l i f e i s faced with the problem of how to achieve o b j e c t i v e s which he d e s i r e s . To achieve such o b j e c t i v e s , most i n d i v i d u a l s tend to consider a range of p o s s i b l e courses of a c t i o n i n c l u d i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n in an educational program. The a c t i o n an i n d i v i d u a l takes to f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of h i s d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s depends on the dynamics of the personal and environmental forces with which he i s i n t e r a c t i n g at the time. U l t i m a t e l y , a c t i o n taken by the i n d i v i d u a l w i l l depend on the r e l a t i v e strength of the forces impinging upon him i n l i g h t of the d e s i r a b i l i t y and importance of the o b j e c t i v e s he wants to achieve. Consequently, providers of formal adult education programs i n i n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s faced with the problem of low enrollment rates are i n t e r e s t e d to know what combination of personal and environmental forces tends to s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s . Because t h i s area of i n q u i r y has been neglected by adult education p a r t i c i p a t i o n researchers, the present study i n v e s t i g a t e d t h i s phenomenon of enrollment d e c i s i o n making. In t h i s regard, the separate and j o i n t impact on such d e c i s i o n making by expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s i n conjunction with s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s were examined. In t h i s concluding chapter, a h o l i s t i c assessment of the 1 46 study i s presented in which the f o l l o w i n g t o p i c s are discussed : summary and conclusions, l i m i t a t i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s of the study. Summary and Conclusions In c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g the problem of enrollment d e c i s i o n making, a d i s t i n c t i o n was made between the concepts of p a r t i c i p a t i o n and enrollment. P a r t i c i p a t i o n focuses on an i n d i v i d u a l already t a k i n g part i n a s p e c i f i c program of i n t e r e s t . Enrollment d e c i s i o n making examines the r e l a t i v e impact of personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s that predispose an i n d i v i d u a l to p r e - r e g i s t e r i n a program. To i n v e s t i g a t e t h i s phenomenon required the use of a d e c i s i o n making t h e o r e t i c a l schema that d e a l t with how people make d e c i s i o n s with regard to achieving t h e i r d e s i r e d outcomes. Modified valence and force models ( M i t c h e l l , 1974; Parker and Dyer, 1976) were adapted and designated i n t h i s study as the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models r e s p e c t i v e l y . In adapting the modified models, cognizance was taken of the issue of which mathematical form ( a d d i t i v e versus m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of the combined force and valence model (expectancy, importance, i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y and valence, Parker and Dyer, [1976]), was a b e t t e r p r e d i c t o r of choice behavior. The modified models were extended f o l l o w i n g M i t c h e l l and Knudsen (1973) and Parker and Dyer (1976) using s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s suggested i n the adult education l i t e r a t u r e to have some bearing on the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of a d u l t s i n c o n t i n u i n g education programs 1 47 ( M i l l e r , 1967; C l a r k e , 1971; Bandura, 1977a and Cross 1981). The s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s used i n conjunction with the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s were the r e s p e c t i v e products of: perceived expectations of f r i e n d s and motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f r i e n d s ; perceived expectations of family and motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f a m i l y ; perceived expectations of employer and motivation to comply w i t h perceived expectations of employer; educational e f f i c a c y and i t s i n f l u e n c e on the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; educational e f f i c a c y expectation and i t s i n f l u e n c e on the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l and s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i t s i n f l u e n c e on the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . Using the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s i n concert with the contextual v a r i a b l e s , a p r i n c i p a l and a secondary question were i n v e s t i g a t e d . Pr inc i p a l Quest ion. Which of the three models, expressive-f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model, was a better p r e d i c t o r of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal con t i n u i n g education program? Secondary Quest ion. Which form of mathematical combination ( a d d i t i v e versus m u l t i p l i c a t i v e ) of the components of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model was a better p r e d i c t o r of an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal con t i n u i n g education program? The i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the problem of enrollment d e c i s i o n making 1 48 r e q u i r e d a program area with a l a r g e population of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who were exposed to the same kinds of promotional devices from which a sample of e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees could be obtained. The Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c , an annual week-long p r o f e s s i o n a l development program for adult educators which had a m a i l i n g l i s t of approximately 10,000 names, not only met these requirements, but a l s o , the organizers of the program were w i l l i n g to cooperate. Hence the population and program area were s e l e c t e d . Published measurement instrument(s) with e s t a b l i s h e d r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y for the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s as w e l l as for the s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s used i n t h i s study could not be l o c a t e d . Consequently, a composite instrument (Appendix B) was developed and p i l o t t e s t e d (see Chapter IV) for the purpose of t h i s study. The LERTAP subprogram was used to obtain the separate i n t e r n a l consistency estimates for each of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s of the models, (expectancy, valence, importance for the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e model, and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence, importance for the instrumental-valence model). Of the 133 questionnaires mailed to i n d i v i d u a l s who had pre-r e g i s t e r e d , 95 responses were returned, of which 88 were usable. The responses from the non-enrollees were obtained from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e s mailed to 400 persons randomly drawn from 10 f i l e s c o n t a i n i n g 3297 names from the Chantauqua by the P a c i f i c m a i l i n g l i s t using an a l p h a b e t i c sampling procedure without replacement. Of the 400 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s mailed, 114 responses were returned of 1 49 which 88 were found usable. In both groups, the questionnaires that were not usable had not been completely answered. D e s c r i p t i v e frequency t a b u l a t i o n s (SPSS) were computed on the socio-demographic and educational v a r i a b l e s (See questionnaire s e c t i o n 1, Appendix B). The SPSS Chi-square subprogram was used to determine i f the d i f f e r e n c e s between the e n r o l l e e s and non-e n r o l l e e s on the v a r i a b l e s were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (p<0.05). The hypotheses were tested using the SPSS subprogram Discriminant to d e r i v e the s i g n i f i c a n t (p< 0.05) p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s from the simultaneous c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a l l the v a r i a b l e s i n each of the hypothesized r e l a t i o n s h i p s (see Table 1). Following are the r e s u l t s and conclusions of the study. The mailed brochure was the p r i n c i p a l source of knowledge about the program from which both the e n r o l l e e s (63.6%) and the non-enrollees (77%) heard that Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c would be conducted i n 1981. The mailed brochure was augmented by information from colleagues which was i n d i c a t e d by 18 (20.5%) of the e n r o l l e e s and 3 (3.4%) of the non-enrollees as a s i g n i f i c a n t source of knowledge about the program. Thus i t would appear that the mailed brochure was the s i n g l e most e f f e c t i v e promotional device. The main hypothesis te s t e d was p o s i t e d as f o l l o w s : that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e , instrumental-valence and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model were equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l i n a formal c o n t i n u i n g education 1 50 program. A l l three models were found to have about the same p r e d i c t i v e a c c u r a c i e s : e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence 88.1% and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e l y combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model 88.6%. For each model the s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r v a r i a b l e s were: (1) the extent to which a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t f e l t that the scheduled time of the program was s u i t a b l e for him to attend (2) h i s perception of h i s employer's expectations regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e and (3) the extent to which the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t f e l t that a set of o b j e c t i v e s was achievable while p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n or as a r e s u l t of having p a r t i c i p a t e d in the program and how d e s i r a b l e and important the achievement of those o b j e c t i v e s were to him (see Tables 14, 16 and 18). Because the f i r s t two of the three s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s that c o n t r i b u t e d most to the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of each of the models were c o n t e x t u a l , t h i s f i n d i n g would seem to i n d i c a t e the paramount importance of such environmental v a r i a b l e s i n p r e d i c t i n g whether or not an i n d i v i d u a l w i l l e n r o l l in a given program. The secondary hypothesis t e s t e d was that the p r e d i c t i v e accuracies of the a d d i t i v e and the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined ex p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model were equal when p r e d i c t i n g an i n d i v i d u a l ' s d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l in a formal c o n t i n u i n g education program. The hypothesis as p o s i t e d was supported. The p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of the a d d i t i v e form was 89.2%; the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e form 88.6%. Again, the analyses revealed that in both instances the 151 f o l l o w i n g personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s were the two primary s i g n i f i c a n t p r e d i c t o r s : ( 1 ) the extent to which a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t f e l t that the time i n which a program was scheduled was s u i t a b l e for him to p a r t i c i p a t e and (2) h i s perception of h i s employer's expectations regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n s to p a r t i c i p a t e . The strength of the p r e d i c t i o n was enhanced by the p r e d i c t o r score derived from the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s of the combined e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model and valence for the a d d i t i v e form. N a t u r a l l y , as i t should be expected, the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of a p r o f e s s i o n a l adult educator employed in an o r g a n i z a t i o n would be influenced by h i s perception of the a t t i t u d e of h i s employer regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a given program over and above the extent to which he may d e s i r e to achieve a given set of o b j e c t i v e s . The a t t i t u d e of the employer i s important because he has to permit the employee to take time o f f to attend ( i . e . i f the employee i s not on h o l i d a y s ) . I f a p r o f e s s i o n a l development program i s to a t t r a c t a high enrollment r a t e , i t does appear that i t would be advantageous i f the timing of the program f i t s conveniently i n t o the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s scheme of t h i n g s , p a r t i c u l a r l y h i s work schedule, as t h i s would considerably improve the readiness of h i s employer to allow him time o f f to attend. In sum t h e r e f o r e , i f behavior i s being p r e d i c t e d (e.g. enrollment d e c i s i o n making as indexed by p r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n ) , research e f f o r t s should be focussed more on the r e l a t i v e i n f l u e n c e 152 of p e r t i n e n t personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s than on a f f e c t i v e or c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r s alone such as expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s . What i s being emphasized t h e r e f o r e , i s the need to take cognisance of the fa c t that even though a person may consider c e r t a i n o b j e c t i v e s d e s i r a b l e and important to achieve, such m e n t a l i s t i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n alone w i l l not r e s u l t i n h i s deciding to e n r o l l i n an educational program. The choice made by an i n d i v i d u a l of the means he expects w i l l f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of h i s d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s w i l l , over and above a f f e c t i v e and c o g n i t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , be l a r g e l y dependent on the favorableness of personal and environmental forces impinging upon him d i r e c t l y at the time. For example, i n the case of an employed p r o f e s s i o n a l , such contextual forces w i l l include a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of h i s employer's a t t i t u d e regarding h i s i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e i n l i g h t of the suit a b l e n e s s of the scheduled time of the program. L i m i t a t i o n s of the Study The subjects of t h i s study were a s e l e c t group by v i r t u e of t h e i r educational backgrounds and by inference socio-economic s t a t u s . Consequently, the kinds of o b j e c t i v e s they would consider d e s i r a b l e would be expected to r e f l e c t the groups' status and would be d i f f e r e n t from those of people with l e s s or no formal educational backgrounds and p o s s i b l y unemployed. S i m i l a r l y , the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c as a p r o f e s s i o n a l development program for adult educators conducted by a u n i v e r s i t y c o n t i n u i n g education center, n a t u r a l l y has . unique c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s r e l a t i v e to other types of educational programs ranging from u n i v e r s i t y c r e d i t 1 53 c o u r s e s t o a d u l t b a s i c e d u c a t i o n programs. A c c o r d i n g l y , g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of the f i n d i n g s of the p r e s e n t study t o the e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n of a d u l t s and t o a l l k i n d s of a d u l t e d u c a t i o n programs s h o u l d be done w i t h g r e a t c a u t i o n . Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r the n o n - e n r o l l e e sample were m a i l e d on June 19, 1981. The i n s i d e p o s t a l workers of Canada went on s t r i k e June 29. At the end of the s t r i k e August 10, the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c had been conducted June 22 th r o u g h 26. S u f f i c i e n t r esponses on which t o base judgement as t o whether or not f o l l o w - u p work was n e c e s s a r y were not r e a l i z e d u n t i l August 24, two weeks a f t e r the end of the s t r i k e . C o n s e q u e n t l y , because of the time gap between the end of the program and the end of the p o s t a l s t r i k e ( s i x weeks) on the one hand, and when da t a c o l l e c t i o n f o r the non-e n r o l l e e s was t e r m i n a t e d on the o t h e r (two weeks), f o l l o w - u p q u e s t i o n n a i r e s or reminder notes were not sent out t o the non-e n r o l l e e sample. T h i s was because i t was f e l t t h a t the respondents might c o n s i d e r such f o l l o w - u p m a t e r i a l i r r e l e v a n t . A c c o r d i n g l y , the p o s t a l s t r i k e may have a f f e c t e d the response r a t e of the non-e n r o l l e e s (114 responded out of 385; 29.6%); i t a l s o made any f o l l o w - u p work t o i n c r e a s e the response r a t e u n r e a l i s t i c . An a s p e c t of the i n s t r u m e n t development (see c h a p t e r IV) t h a t c o u l d not be exe c u t e d as o r i g i n a l l y p l a n n e d had t o do w i t h the i n a b i l i t y t o i n t e r v i e w the s u b j e c t s of the p i l o t s t u d y . Such i n t e r v i e w i n g would have been i d e a l i n terms of p r o v i d i n g an o p p o r t u n i t y t o c r o s s check the e x t e n t t o which the respondents gave the same meaning as were i n t e n d e d t o - t h e q u e s t i o n s asked i n the 154 instrument. However, by the time the instrument was developed and p i l o t t e s t e d (May 17 through 23), t h i s l e f t only four weeks to the commencement date of the program on June 22. Accordingly, i t was f e l t that i t would not be p r a c t i c a l to conduct interviews and re v i s e the qu e s t i o n n a i r e , i f necessary, in time to mail i t to the e n r o l l e e s and for them to respond before the program. Consequently, a d e c i s i o n was made not to conduct i n t e r v i e w s , because to have done so would have made i t almost impossible to use the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Such a development would have meant a delay of one year which the researcher could not a f f o r d because of time and f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n s . The e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models were based on Havighurst's (1964) d i s t i n c t i o n between expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s - - a d i s t i n c t i o n that was fu r t h e r supported by Marcus' (1976) study. In the present study, both models were found to have equal p r e d i c t i v e a ccuracies (88.1%), suggesting that the respondents might not have perceived the two types of o b j e c t i v e s d i f f e r e n t l y or that they f e l t that the d e s i r a b i l i t y of achieving both types of o b j e c t i v e s was equal. An ambiguity r a t i o of .09 was r e a l i z e d for the 30 o b j e c t i v e s (15 expressive and 15 instrumental) when the scores incompatible with the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the panel of 10 judges, t o t a l i n g 24, was d i v i d e d by those c o n s i s t e n t with i t , t o t a l i n g 276. The 10 expressive and 10 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s (Schwab, et a l . , 1976) that were f i n a l l y used i n the present study were not resubmitted to the panel of judges for f u r t h e r r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n before the instrument developed 1 55 using the o b j e c t i v e s was p i l o t t e s t e d and mailed to the respondents. The r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e s could have aided the f u r t h e r establishment of the d i s t i n c t i v e n e s s of the two sets of o b j e c t i v e s . A c o n t i n u i n g problem i n t h i s and other expectancy theory research i s the somewhat i d i o s y n c r a t i c use of a number of terms: behavior, f o r c e , outcomes, a c t i o n , expectancy, performance, c o g n i t i v e and a f f e c t i v e o r i e n t a t i o n s , valence, d e s i r a b i l i t y , importance, i n t r i n s i c and e x t r i n s i c outcomes, and e f f o r t . Formulas, p r o p o s i t i o n s and models are used interchangeably i n the l i t e r a t u r e adding to the c o m p l e x i t i e s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Although Vroom's (1964) o r i g i n a l t r e a t i s e had two p r o p o s i t i o n s and treated valence as a component of f o r c e , t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n has become i n c r e a s i n g l y b l u r r e d as dozens of researchers have each sought to b u i l d on what they i n t e r p r e t e d as Vroom's concepts. The r e s u l t i n g l i t e r a t u r e which now includes at l e a s t ten models, each with i t s own set of o p e r a t i o n a l d e f i n i t i o n s , d e f i e s r a t i o n a l synthesis i n t o a s i n g l e comprehensive model. I t must be acknowledged that t h i s study of enrollment d e c i s i o n making which involved the c o n s t r u c t i o n of an e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and an instrumental-valence model has not c o n t r i b u t e d to the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of expectancy v a r i a b l e s such that they can be f i t t e d i n t o a s i n g l e model as t h i s was not the focus of the present study. This i n v e s t i g a t i o n however, d i d r e a f f i r m the importance of contextual v a r i a b l e s as determinants in the enrollment d e c i s i o n making process. 1 56 I m p l i c a t i o n s of the Study In l i g h t of the f i n d i n g s and con c l u s i o n s of the present study, the p r a c t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s to adul t education program providers w i l l f i r s t be presented. This w i l l be followed by i m p l i c a t i o n s f or theory and research. P r a c t i c a l I m p l i c a t i o n s The p r a c t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s that can be drawn from the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study i n order of t h e i r importance i n i n f l u e n c i n g a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making are r e l a t e d to a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s perception of h i s employer's a t t i t u d e towards h i s p o s s i b l e enrollment i n a program; the s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of the program; the d e s i r e of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to achieve both expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s ; and the mailed brochure as the p r i n c i p a l promotional device. Perceived Employer's A t t i t u d e . The perception by a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t that h i s employer has an encouraging a t t i t u d e regarding h i s p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an educational program does in f l u e n c e the p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e to make a p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n . As an employee, even i f a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t should consider that an a d v e r t i s e d program might f a c i l i t a t e the achievement of h i s de s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s , but perceive h i s employer not to be favorably disposed to h i s tak i n g part at the time because of reasons connected to h i s work s i t u a t i o n , i t i s u n l i k e l y that the p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e w i l l make a p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n . Thus, in a p r o f e s s i o n a l development program such as Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c , 1 57 i t i s l i k e l y to be an e f f e c t i v e promotional s t r a t e g y i f program announcement m a t e r i a l s are sent through employers in which the advantages to t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s of having t h e i r employees p a r t i c i p a t e are c l e a r l y s p e l t out as already suggested by Houle (1972). Such a marketing strategy would not only make the employers f e e l that they are been made aware of program areas advantageous to t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , but a l s o the fact that the promotional m a t e r i a l s are sent through them recognizes t h e i r p o s i t i o n s of a u t h o r i t y thus predisposing them to have a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e with regard to t h e i r employees ta k i n g part i n the program. Such cooperation between program providers and employers w i l l a l s o enable the l a t e r to schedule t h e i r programs at a time that would be convenient to both the educational i n s t i t u t i o n and i t s p o t e n t i a l part i c i p a n t s . Furthermore, c h a n n e l l i n g program announcement m a t e r i a l s through those who employ large numbers of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s w i l l have the advantage of reducing the number of brochures mailed out. This i s because cooperating employers would not only o f f i c i a l l y disseminate the program information (e.g. posting advance program information m a t e r i a l on t h e i r b u l l e t i n boards) but a l s o because they are favorably disposed to the program, they are more l i k e l y to create favorable a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r o v i s i o n s (e.g. i n d i c a t i n g t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to allow time o f f for attendance) that would encourage p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s ( t h e i r employees) to make p o s i t i v e enrollment d e c i s i o n s . S u i t a b i l i t y of Time. As an employee, the p o t e n t i a l 158 p a r t i c i p a n t has commitments with regard to h i s work s i t u a t i o n as w e l l as i n h i s own personal l i f e . Thus, the l i k e l i h o o d of an employed p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t p r e - r e g i s t e r i n g for a program would be considerably enhanced i f the scheduling of the program in which he wants to e n r o l l i s s u i t a b l e for him to take part t a k i n g cognisance of h i s commitments i n h i s " l a r g e r p a t t e r n ( s ) of l i f e " (Houle, 1972, p.53). This f i n d i n g does underscore the need for program providers to work c l o s e l y with the employers of t h e i r target population while scheduling t h e i r programs. S i m i l a r l y , i t might be a u s e f u l strategy to send out a short survey q u e s t i o n n a i r e to a sample of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to an intended program a few months p r i o r to the s t a r t of the promotional d r i v e for the program. In such an instrument, respondents would be requested to i n d i c a t e the time they want the next program scheduled, for how long and which workshops they would most d e s i r e to see conducted. Such a p r e l i m i n a r y f a c t f i n d i n g procedure might enhance the o v e r a l l programming scheme in such areas as timing of the program and ensuring that the workshops o f f e r e d are those which the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s consider most d e s i r a b l e at the time. Desired O b j e c t i v e s . E n r o l l e e s tended to e n r o l l to achieve both expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s (See Table 11). The expectation to achieve both types of o b j e c t i v e s as a s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on a p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making was evident from the fact that both the e x p r e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence models had the same p r e d i c t i v e accuracies (88.1%). Consequently, a p r o f e s s i o n a l development program that 159 includes not only courses which are expected to enhance the e n r o l l e e ' s l a t e r p r o f e s s i o n a l development but a l s o , courses i n which he can achieve immediate s a t i s f a c t i o n while p a r t i c i p a t i n g are l i k e l y to r e s u l t i n increased enrollment from p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s . Mailed Brochures. The mailed brochure was the most fre q u e n t l y reported means by which respondents heard of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c . Consequently, the j o i n t use of the mail brochure with other promotional devices l i k e a d v e r t i s i n g i n j o u r n a l s , newsletters and the use of f l y e r s which were not s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05) sources of knowledge of the program, may not a c t u a l l y be necessary since the other s i g n i f i c a n t source of knowledge about the program was information obtained through colleagues. I t would therefore seem to be a more e f f i c i e n t promotional strategy i n terms of reducing the number of brochures sent out, to mail advance brochures to employers who i n turn could be requested to b r i n g such information to the n o t i c e of t h e i r employees who are l i k e l y to p a r t i c i p a t e . P r e - r e g i s t r a t i o n packages could then be mailed to such employees i f requested by them. Given that the knowledge obtained about the program through colleagues was a l s o a s i g n i f i c a n t source, i t would seem u s e f u l to encourage p a r t i c i p a n t s to spread word about the next program among t h e i r work mates. Thus, p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s who were non-e n r o l l e e s for a p a r t i c u l a r conference are more l i k e l y to be among the e n r o l l e e s i n a subsequent conference p a r t l y because of the favourable recommendation given to the program by t h e i r colleagues who are former p a r t i c i p a n t s . 1 60 Theoret i c a l Implicat ions The t h e o r e t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s that can be drawn from the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study by v i r t u e of t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the p r e d i c t i o n of enrollment d e c i s i o n making are presented in t h i s s e c t i o n in order of t h e i r importance: the use of contextual v a r i a b l e s to extend expectancy models; the conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n between valence and importance and the a d d i t i v e versus the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the components of the force and valence models. Contextual V a r i a b l e s . The extention of expectancy models using personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s revealed that for the s e l e c t samples of t h i s study, c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e s tended to be more h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d with the behavior being p r e d i c t e d ( d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ) when a l l of the v a r i a b l e s (expectancy and non-expectancy) were considered simultaneously (see Table 13). This f i n d i n g i s s i m i l a r to those found i n previous s t u d i e s ( M i t c h e l l and Knudsen, 1973; Parker and Dyer, 1976). Both s t u d i e s had a l s o used s e l e c t samples: psychology and business students and Naval O f f i c e r s r e s p e c t i v e l y , thus r a i s i n g the question of what the trend might be with a sample randomly drawn from an adult population. For the samples of t h i s study, s u i t a b i l i t y of time and the perception by p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s of t h e i r employer's a t t i t u d e regarding t h e i r i n t e n t i o n to take part i n a program were the most important p r e d i c t o r s when a l l the v a r i a b l e s were considered simultaneously. This leads to the conclusion as was p o s i t e d i n t h i s study, that i n p r e d i c t i n g behavior, while i t i s important to 161 know the mental d i s p o s i t i o n of a person regarding an intended a c t i o n , in and of i t s e l f , i t i s not s u f f i c i e n t . There i s need to take the t o t a l i t y of the s i t u a t i o n i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n , thus, examining simultaneously the i n t e r a c t i o n of personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s . A c c o r d i n g l y , as was evident from the order i n which the s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e s entered the d i s c r i m i n a n t functions i n t h i s study, whether or not a given a c t i o n i s taken by an i n d i v i d u a l (e.g. e n r o l l i n g i n an educational program) i s to a large extent dependent on the favorableness of the contextual f a c t o r s . Consequently, i n expectancy theory research, i t would seem to be of paramount importance to give contextual v a r i a b l e s more a t t e n t i o n than they have been given i n the past. Conceptual Di st i n c t ion between Valence and Importance. Following Parker and Dyer (1976), a d i s t i n c t i o n was made between valence and importance i n t h i s study. The d i s t i n c t i o n was maintained i n both models (see Table 13). The i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n s between valence and importance and the d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l were s i g n i f i c a n t (p<.05): .48 and .48 (expressive model), .50 and .56 (instrumental model). Although i t was valence that emerged as a s i g n i f i c a n t d i s c r i m i n a t o r when both v a r i a b l e s were considered simultaneously with s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s , because both v a r i a b l e s (valence and importance) were moderately c o r r e l a t e d with each other; .56 expressive model and .57 instrumental model (see Table 13), i t would seem that there i s need to r e t a i n and f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e t h i s conceptual d i s t i n c t i o n . Such an i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s needed because, although c o n t e x t u a l v a r i a b l e s were the primary determinants of whether or not an 162 i n d i v i d u a l would e n r o l l i n a given program, the r e s u l t of such d e c i s i o n making was g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by the extent to which he considered the o b j e c t i v e s he expected to achieve d e s i r a b l e and important. A d d i t i v e versus M u l t i p l i c a t i v e Combination of Models. The expectancy force and valence models each modified separately with importance, or both combined and modified with importance (Parker and Dyer, 1976) appear to be v e r s a t i l e schemas around which f u r t h e r study of enrollment d e c i s i o n making i n s i m i l a r and other adult education s e t t i n g s could be anchored. While the conceptual system provided the t h e o r e t i c a l anchorage for t h i s study, i t does seem that not much was gained i n terms of p r e d i c t i v e accuracy by e i t h e r the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the components of the force and valence models moderated by importance as suggested by Parker and Dyer (1976) or the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the components of ne i t h e r of the force and valence models each moderated by importance. This was apparent f o l l o w i n g the comparative analyses of the p r e d i c t i v e a ccuracies of the a d d i t i v e versus the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e forms of the combined expr e s s i v e - f o r c e and instrumental-valence model. Rather, what was h i g h l i g h t e d again was the s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n of contextual v a r i a b l e s in the enchancement of p r e d i c t i v e accuracy. Thus, i t would seem that where behavior i s being p r e d i c t e d from an expectancy model i n combination with s e l e c t e d contextual v a r i a b l e s , i t does not matter which form of mathematical combination i s used i n terms of p r e d i c t i v e accuracy. I t should 1 63 however be noted that with the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e combination of the components of the expectancy theory i t i s not p o s s i b l e to determine which components of the theory s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o n t r i b u t e d to the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy. In c o n t r a s t , the a d d i t i v e form has some advantage over the m u l t i p l i c a t i v e form as i t i s p o s s i b l e to determine which of the v a r i a b l e s c o n t r i b u t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy. Suggest ions for Further Research At the onset of t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , i t was noted that the phenomenon of enrollment d e c i s i o n making has not yet had the research a t t e n t i o n i t deserves. While considerable research work has been done on various aspects of the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behavior of ad u l t s i n educational programs, the question of determining the combination of forces that impel p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to decide to e n r o l l i n educational programs as a means of achieving t h e i r d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s i s yet to be given comparable research a t t e n t i o n . Consequently, the present study focused on the phenomenon of enrollment d e c i s i o n making and attempted to determine what personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s i n f l u e n c e d such d e c i s i o n making. In l i g h t of the f i n d i n g s of t h i s study, the f o l l o w i n g research suggestions are presented in order of t h e i r urgency: determining d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s r e l a t i v e to d i f f e r e n t c ategories of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s and a f u r t h e r examination of the contextual v a r i a b l e s used i n t h i s study r e l a t i v e to d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s . 164 Determining Object ives for Di f ferent Potent i a l Part i c i p a n t s • The d e c i s i o n s i n d i v i d u a l s make regarding whether or not they w i l l e n r o l l i n an educational program center around t h e i r expectation of achi e v i n g s p e c f i c o b j e c t i v e s which they want to achieve at any given time. In the l i t e r a t u r e of adult education, a d i s t i n c t i o n i s made between expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s . In the simultaneous p r e s e n t a t i o n of both types of o b j e c t i v e s to the respondents of t h i s study i n the attempt to determine which set was more important i n i n f l u e n c i n g t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making, i t was found that the respondents decided to e n r o l l to achieve both kinds of o b j e c t i v e s (the p r e d i c t i v e accuracy of both models, expressive and instrum e n t a l , was 88.1%). The respondents of t h i s study were mostly p r o f e s s i o n a l s employed i n various adult education o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Hence i t was not s u r p r i s i n g to see them e n r o l l i n g for instrumental reasons that could c o n t r i b u t e to t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l development as w e l l as e n r o l l i n g f o r such i n t r i n s i c reasons as l e a r n i n g f o r the sake of l e a r n i n g . Consequently, the next major research that should be undertaken i s to f i n d out for what kinds of o b j e c t i v e s the f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s are l i k e l y to e n r o l l in an educational program: c o l l e g e educated unemployed, underemployed and unemployed " i l l i t e r a t e s " . The r e s u l t s of such stud i e s w i l l help to compile data with regard to the kinds of o b j e c t i v e s to use for p r e d i c t i o n purposes r e l a t i v e to the kinds of c l i e n t e l e f or which a program i s being designed at any given time. Contextual V a r i a b l e s and Potent i a l P a r t i c i p a n t s . The 165 s u i t a b i l i t y of the scheduled time of a program as w e l l as the perception of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s of the a t t i t u d e of t h e i r employers regarding t h e i r i n t e n t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e in a program were the s i g n i f i c a n t s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s that d i f f e r e n t i a t e d e n r o l l e e s from non-enrollees. The su i t a b l e n e s s of time as a f a c t o r in i n f l u e n c i n g the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behaviour of ad u l t s i n co n t i n u i n g education seems to be emerging as an important v a r i a b l e as demonstrated by previous stud i e s (Clarke, 1971; Carp, et a l . , 1974; Waniewicz, 1976). The subjects of the present study were mostly employed (92.6%) adult education p r o f e s s i o n a l s working in various o r g a n i z a t i o n s for whom time must be convenient r e l a t i v e to t h e i r job s i t u a t i o n i f t h e i r employers are to permit them to attend. A p e r t i n e n t question that can be asked i s whether or not time w i l l be an important f a c t o r among c o l l e g e educated unemployed, underemployed and among unemployed " i l l i t e r a t e s " . To the subjects of t h i s study, such persons as f r i e n d s and family were not s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r s i n i n f l u e n c i n g t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. However, given that f r i e n d s , work mates and family members have been suggested as important i n f l u e n c e s in the p a r t i c i p a t o r y behaviour of a d u l t s of lower socio-economic c l a s s i n cont i n u i n g education programs ( M i l l e r , 1967; Cross, 1981), the next question would seem to be that of determining e m p i r i c a l l y the r e l a t i v e i n f l u e n c e of such s i g n i f i c a n t others on the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s of high and low s o c i o -economic status varying for example, such f a c t o r s as age, gender, l e v e l of education and employment s t a t u s . Knox (1977) suggested that the b e l i e f of p o t e n t i a l 166 p a r t i c i p a n t s i n education as a means of gaining mastery over t h e i r environment (educational e f f i c a c y ) was a s s o c i a t e d with high p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s . The b e l i e f i n educational e f f i c a c y by the subjects of t h i s study d i d not emerge as a s i g n i f i c a n t d i s c r i m i n a t o r between the samples because both the e n r o l l e e s (98%) and non-enrollees (90%) be l i e v e d i n the idea. Consequently, for the subjects of t h i s study, the issue of whether or not the b e l i e f i n education i n the g l o b a l sense as a means of gai n i n g mastery over t h e i r environment was an i n f l u e n c e i n t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making might have been an i r r e l e v a n t question. These people were in the business of education and what education could or could not brin g about might not have been an issue to which they gave any s p e c i f i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n . But then, what of people with no formal education who see people with such education i n p o s i t i o n s of power i n t h e i r s o c i e t i e s whom they tend to i d e n t i f y as oppressors. For such people with l i t t l e or no education who c o n s t i t u t e the masses at the grassroots ( i . e . , the have-nots), i t i s suspected that there might be more v a r i a t i o n s regarding t h e i r b e l i e f s i n education i n a g l o b a l sense as a means of gaining c o n t r o l of t h e i r environment. However, t h i s issue of the b e l i e f in education as a means of gaining c o n t r o l over one's environment being a s s o c i a t e d with high p a r t i c i p a t i o n rates r e l a t i v e to haves and haves-nots i n a s o c i e t y by v i r t u e of t h e i r education awaits e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The d i s t i n c t i o n made by Bandura (1977a) between expectancy and s e l f - e f f i c a c y i s important. For the subjects of t h i s study, the question of t h e i r a b i l i t y to execute the content m a t e r i a l of 167 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c (educational e f f i c i e n c y expectations) was not an issue i n t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making; 100% of the e n r o l l e e s and 99% of the non-enrollees b e l i e v e d that they were capable of executing the program. This was not s u r p r i s i n g . By v i r t u e of t h e i r l e v e l of education, the content m a t e r i a l of Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c was not such as would be threatening to them. Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c i s a p r o f e s s i o n a l development program designed to keep p a r t i c i p a n t s abreast with new trends i n what they are doing in t h e i r work s i t u a t i o n s . There was no f i n a l examination such that the question of passing or f a i l i n g , the r e s u l t of which i s c r u c i a l for t h e i r employment, reemployment or promotion was at stake. However, the fact that other researchers i n adult education have noted that i n c o n s i d e r i n g whether or not to take part i n educational programs, a d u l t s tend to be concerned with t h e i r a b i l i t y to l e a r n (McClusky and Jensen, 1959; Kidd, 1973; Knox, 1977) i t might be that concerns regarding a b i l i t y to perform are only a t t r i b u t a b l e to c e r t a i n kinds of a d u l t s i n s p e c i f i c educational programs: adult basic education, high school equivalency programs, programs designed for admittance i n t o s p e c i f i c trades or a c q u i r i n g c e r t i f i c a t i o n for which success i s measured by o b t a i n i n g a given, grade i n a c r i t e r i o n standard t e s t . In such a s i t u a t i o n , i t i s suspected that educational e f f i c a c y expectations might l i k e l y be an issue among the p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s p a r t i c u l a r l y those who have.had a h i s t o r y of f a i l u r e i n the educational system. 168 In sum, the present study had attempted to determine which among a set of s e l e c t e d personal and environmental v a r i a b l e s analysed w i t h i n an expectancy t h e o r e t i c a l schema had the most in f l u e n c e on an i n d i v i d u a l ' s enrollment d e c i s i o n making. The r e s u l t s showed that contextual v a r i a b l e s had a decidedly more s i g n i f i c a n t i n f l u e n c e on enrollment d e c i s i o n making than a f f e c t i v e and c o g n i t i v e v a r i a b l e s . Consequently, i n future studies of enrollment d e c i s i o n making, the impact of contextual v a r i a b l e s should be f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e d in l i g h t of expressive and instrumental o b j e c t i v e s p e r t i n e n t to d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s of c l i e n t e l e in various programming catchment areas. 1 69 B i b l i o g r a p h y A l l e n , M. J . and Yen, N.M. I n t r o d u c t i o n to measurement theory. C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks/Cole P u b l i s h i n g Company, 1979. A s l a n i a n , C.B. & B r i c k w e l l , H. M. Americans in t r a n s i t i o n : L i f e  changes as reasons, for adult l e a r n i n g . New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1980. Atkinson, J . W. An i n t r o d u c t i o n to motivation. P r i n c e t o n , New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1964. Bandura, A. Soc i a l l e a r n i n g theory. Englewood C l i f f s , N. J . , P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1977. Bandura, A. S e l f - e f f i c a c y : toward a u n i f y i n g theory of behavioral change. P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1977a, 84 (2), 191-215. B a t t l e , E. S. M o t i v a t i o n a l determinants of academic tasks p e r s i s t e n c e . Journal of P e r s o n a l i t y and Soc i a l Psychoology, 1965, ( 2 ) , 209-218. Boshier, R. W. M o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n s of adult education p a r t i c i p a n t s : A f a c t o r a n a l y t i c e x p l o r a t i o n of Houle's typology, Adult Education, 1971, 2J_ (2), 3-26. Boshier, R. W. Educational p a r t i c i p a t i o n and dropout: A t h e o r e t i c a l model. Adult Education, 1973, 23 (4), 255-282. Boshier, R. W. Factor a n a l y s i s at l a r g e : A c r i t i c a l review of the m o t i v a t i o n a l o r i e n t a t i o n l i t e r a t u r e . Adult Education, 1976, 27, 24-47. Boshier, R. W. Research on part i c ipat i o n : A conceptual and Education, 1980, 20, (1), 3-20. Burgess, P. Reasons for adult p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n group educational a c t i v i t i e s . Adult education, 1971, 22 (1), 3-29. Carp, A; Peterson, R. & R o e l f s , P. Adult Learning i n t e r e s t s and experiences. In Cross, K. P.; V a l l e y , J . R & Associates (Ed.), Planning n o n - t r a d i t i o n a l programs. San-Francisco: Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1974. Cross, P. K. Adult l e a r n e r s : c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , needs and i n t e r e s t s . In Peterson, R. E. & Associates (Ed.), Toward  l i f elong l e a r n i n g i n amer i c a : a sourcebook for planners. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1980. methodological A u s t r a l i a n J . Adult C l a r k , B. R. The m a r g i n a l i t y of adult education. Notes and Essays (20). Chicago: Center for the Study of L i b e r a l Education for A d u l t s , 1958. 1 70 Clar k e , J . M. C. F a i l u r e to r e - e n r o l l in non-credit, u n i v e r s i t y ,  c o n t i n u i n g educat ion programs. Unpublished M. A. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1971. Connolly, T. Some conceptual and methodological issues in expectancy models of work performance motivation. Academy of  Management Review, 1976, j _ , 37-47. Cross, P. K. Adults as l e a r n e r s . San Fr a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1981. Darkenwald, G. G. Suggest ions for advanc ing research and theory  on part i c i p a t ion i n adult educat ion. Paper presented at the meeting of the Commission of Professors of Adult Education Meeting, St. Lou i s , M i s s o u r i , November 1980. Dicki n s o n , G., & Verner, C. "Canada" i n Learning o p p o r t u n i t i e s f or a d u l t s : V o l . IV part i c i p a t ion i n adult educat io n , Par i s: O. E. C. D., 1977, 75-109. Edwards, W. The theory of d e c i s i o n making. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1954, 5J_, 380-417. Edwards, W. Subjective p r o b a b i l i t i e s i n f e r r e d from d e c i s i o n s . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 1962, 69 (2), 109-135. G a l b r a i t h , J . & Cummings, L. L. An e m p i r i c a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n of the m o t i v a t i o n a l determinants of task performance: i n t e r a c t i v e e f f e c t s between i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y - v a l e n c e and moti v a t i o n -a b i l i t y . O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 1967, 237-257. G r i f f i t h , W. S. Personal communication, January 15, 1982. G r i f f i t h , W. S. Personal communication, A p r i l 23, 1982. Havighurst, R. J . Human development and educat ion. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1953. Havighurst, R. J . Changing status and r o l e s during the adult l i f e c y c l e : S i g n i f i c a n c e for adult education. In Burns, R. W. (Ed.), S o c i o l o g i c a l backgrounds of adult education. Syracuse: Center for the Study of L i b e r a l Education for A d u l t s , 1964, 17-38. Houle, C. 0. The i n q u i r i n g mind. Madison: U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin Press, 1961. Houle, C. 0. The design of educat io n . San Fra n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1972. H u l l , C. L. P r i n c i p l e s of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-C r o f t s , 1943. 171 Jensen, G., L i v e r i g h t , A. A., & Hallenbeck, W. (Eds.) Adult  educat ion: O u t l i n e s of an emerging f i e l d of u n i v e r s i t y study. Washington: Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n , 1964. Johnstone, J . W. C , & Ri v e r a , R. J . Volunteers for l e a r n i n g . Chicago: Aldine P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1965. Kidd, J . R. How a d u l t s l e a r n . New York: A s s o c i a t i o n Press, 1973. K i t a , S. UBC SPSS: Stat i st i c a l package for the soc i a l sc iences  v e r s i o n 8.00 (under MTS). Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Computing Centre, 1978, 1980. Knox, A. B., & Videbeck, R. Adult education and adult l i f e c y c l e . Adult Education, 1963, 13, (2), 103-121. Knox, A. B. Adult development and l e a r n i n g . San Fr a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1977. Kunreuther, H. Limi t e d knowledge and insurance p r o t e c t i o n . P u b l i c  P o l i c y , 1976, 24, 224-261. Lave, C. A., & March, J . G. An i n t r o d u c t i o n to models i n the  soc i a l sc iences. New York: Harper and Row, 1975. Lawler, E. E., I I , & P o r t e r , L. W. An antecedent a t t i t u d e s of e f f e c t i v e managerial performance. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and  Human Performance, 1967, 2_j_ 122-142. Lewin, K. Dynamic theory of p e r s o n a l i t y . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1 935. Lewin, K. The conceptual representation and the measurement of  ps y c h o l o g i c a l f o r c e s . Durham: Duke U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1938. Marcus, E. E. E f f e c t s of age, sex, and socioeconomic status on  adult educat ion p a r t i c i p a n t s ' percept ion of the u t i l i t y of  t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, 1976. Matsui, T., & Ikeda, H. E f f e c t i v e n e s s of self-generated outcomes for improving p r e d i c t i o n in expectancy theory research. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and Human Performance, 1976, 17, 289-298. McClusky, H. Y. The course of the adult l i f e span. Adult  Education Theory and Method, 1963, 10-19. McClusky, H. Y., & Jensen, G. The psychology of a d u l t s . Review  of Educational Research, 1959, 29, 246-255. Mezirow, J . Toward a theory of p r a c t i c e . Adult Education, 1971, 2J_ (3) , 135-147. 172 Mezirow, J . , Darkenwald, G. G., & Knox, A. B. Last gamble on  education; Dynamics of a d u l t basic educat ion. Washington, D. C : Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n of the U. S. A., 1975. M i l l e r , H. L. Part i c ipat ion of a d u l t s i n educat i o n : A force-f i e l d  a n a l y s i s . B r o o k l i n e , Massachusetts: Center for the Study of L i b e r a l Education in A d u l t s , 1967, (14). M i t c h e l l , T. R. Expectancy models of job s a t i s f a c t i o n , occupational preference and e f f o r t : A t h e o r e t i c a l , methodological, and e m p i r i c a l a p p r a i s a l . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1974, 8J_ (12), 1053-1077. M i t c h e l l , T. R. Expectancy-value models in organ i z a t i o n a l  psychology. Manuscript submitted for p u b l i c a t i o n , 1981a. M i t c h e l l , T. R. Personal communication, February 4, 1981b. M i t c h e l l , T. R., & Beach, L. R. A review of occupational preference and choice research using expectancy theory and d e c i s i o n theory. J o u r n a l of Occupational Psychology, 1976, 49 , 231-248. M i t c h e l l , T. R., & Knudsen, B. W. I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y theory p r e d i c t i o n s of student's a t t i t u d e s towards business and t h e i r choice of business as an occupation. Academy of Management  J o u r n a l , 1973, Jj6 (1), 41-52. Morrison, D. F. Mult i v a r i a t e s t a t i s t i c a l analyses (2nd e d i t i o n ) . New York: McGraw-Hill Company, 1976 Morstain, B. R. & Smart, J . C. A m o t i v a t i o n a l typology of adult l e a r n e r s . Journal of Higher Educat io n , 1977, 48_ (6), 665-679. Nelson, L. R. Guide to LERTAP use and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Dunedin, New Zealand: Department of Education, U n i v e r s i t y of Otago, 1974. Nie, N. H., et a l . SPSS: Stat i st i c a l package f o r the soc i a l  sciences (2nd E d i t i o n ) . New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1 975. Parker, D., & Dyer, L. Expectancy theory as a within-person b e h a v i o r a l choice model: An e m p i r i c a l t e s t of some conceptual and methodological refinements. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and  Human Performance, 1976, j_7, 97-117. Peterson, R. E. Present sources of education and l e a r n i n g . In Peterson, R. E. & Associates (Ed.), Toward 1 i f e l o n g l e a r n i n g  in amer i c a : a sourcebook for planners. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass P u b l i s h e r s , 1980. Pole, T. A h i s t o r y of the o r g i n and progress of adult schools. B r i s t o l : McDowall, 1816. 173 Rubenson, K. Recruitment in adult educat ion: A research s t r a t e g y . Stockholm: School of Education, 1976. Schwab, D. P., O l i a n - G o t t l i e b , J . D. , & Heneman, H. G., I I I . Between-subjects expectancy theory research: A s t a t i s t i c a l review of studi e s p r e d i c t i n g e f f o r t and performance. P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 1979, 86, 139-147. S l o v i c , P., F i s c h h o f f , P., & L i c h t e n s t e i n , S. Behavioral d e c i s i o n theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 1977, 2IB, 1-39. Stee r s , R. M., & P o r t e r , L. M. Mot i v a t i o n and work behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1979. Tay l o r , D. W. De c i s i o n making and problem s o l v i n g . In J . G. March (Ed.), Handbook of o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1965. Thorndike, E. L. The Fundamentals of Learning. New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1932. Tolman, E. C. Purposive behavior i n animals and men. New York: The Century Co., 1932. Vroom, V. H. Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1964. Vroom, V. H. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l choice: A study of pre- and po s t d e c i s i o n process. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l Behavior and Human  Performance, 1966, _1_, 212-225. Vroom, V. H. Personal communication, March 5, 1981. Wahba, M. A., & House, R. J . Expectancy theory in work and moti v a t i o n : Some l o g i c a l and methodological i s s u e s . Human  R e l a t i o n s , 1974, 27 (2), 121-147. Waniewicz, I . Demand for part-time l e a r n i n g i n Ontario. Toronto: The Ontario Educational Communications A u t h o r i t y , 1976. Wanous, J . P. Occupational preferences: Perceptions of valence and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , and o b j e c t i v e data. Journal of Appl i e d  Psychology, 1972, 56, 152-155. APPENDIX A CORRESPONDENCE SEEKING APPROVAL TO CONDUCT STUDY INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia A d u l t Educa t ion Department 5760 Toronto Road Vancouver , B»C. V6T 1L2 Canada March 18, 1981 M r . J i n d r a K u l i c h , d i r e c t o r C e n t r e f o r C o n t i n u i n g Educa t ion U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Re: Request to use i n s t i t u t i o n and c l i e n t e l e i n the study E n r o l l m e n t : A D e c i s i o n Makinq P e r s p e c t i v e Dear M r . K u l i c h , I am a second year d o c t o r a l s tudent i n a d u l t educa t ion and I am w r i t i n g to request your p e r m i s s i o n t o use your i n s t i t u t i o n and p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to the 1981 Chautauqua as the contex t and s u b j e c t s for my d i s s e r t a t i o n . The problem of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n stems from the p e r s i s t e n t concern of program d i r e c t o r s fo r the inadequate response by p o t e n t i a l a d u l t l e a r n e r s to program announcements, d e s p i t e the tremendous amount of e f f o r t and resources expended i n p r o m o t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s . I t has f r e q u e n t l y been suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e that p a r t i c i p a t i o n has to do w i t h the r e l a t i v e importance a p o t e n t i a l a d u l t l e a r n e r p l ace s on educa t ion as a means t o achieve s p e c i f i c d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s at a g iven moment. D e s p i t e the c e n t r a l i t y of the problem to the c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n e n t e r p r i s e , a f a c t tha t i s f u r t h e r underscored by the p o l i c y of f i n a n c i n g being t i e d to enro l lment whose r e p e r c u s s i o n permeates the i s sue of s t a f f i n g , the c o n t i n u i t y of any s p e c i f i c program and u l t i m a t e l y the p r o v i d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n , i t does seem t h a t no e m p i r i c a l s tudy has been undertaken to e x p l o r e t h i s phenomenon from a d e c i s i o n making p e r s p e c t i v e . T h i s study i s a f i r s t attempt to employ a d e c i s i o n making t h e o r e t i c a l ramework to determine the r e l a t i v e weights as a s ses sed by p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s to a s p e c i f i c c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n program ( i n t h i s case Chautauqua 1981) of the f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s : expectancy , i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , v a l e n c e , impor tance , s u b j e c t i v e s o c i a l norms, e d u c a t i o n a l e f f i c a c y , e f f i c a c y e x p e c t a t i o n and s u i t a b l e n e s s of the scheduled time of the program, in t h e i r enro l lment d e c i s i o n . Us ing these f a c t o r s which have been a s s o c i a t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e w i t h h igh e n r o l l m e n t , three r e sea rch q u e s t i o n s are p o s i t e d : ( i ) do the s p e c i f i e d v a r i a b l e s have any impact on enro l lment d e c i s i o n ; ( i i ) to what extent do the p e r c e i v e d e x p e c t a t i o n s of s i g n i f i c a n t o t h e r s i n f l u e n c e e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ; and ( i i i ) which has more impact i n i n f l u e n c i n g a p o t e n t i a l a d u l t l e a r n e r to opt for p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a s p e c i f i c c o n t i n u i n g educa t ion program as a means of a t t a i n i n g d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s , e x p r e s s i v e or i n s t r u m e n t a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ? A copy of my approved p r o p o s a l and 1 79 Instrument Development The f i r s t step was to develop a standard l i s t of 10 expressive and 10 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s . Using the sets of o b j e c t i v e s , the expectancy theory v a r i a b l e s i n v e s t i g a t e d i n t h i s study were measured r e l a t i v e to the o b j e c t i v e s : expectancy, valence and importance (expressive o b j e c t i v e s ) ; and i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and importance (instrumental o b j e c t i v e s ) . Measures were a l s o developed to assess the extent to which the products of each of the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s influenced the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of the subjects studied: perceived expectations of f r i e n d s and motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f r i e n d s ; perceived expectations of family and motivation to comply with perceived expectations of f a m i l y ; perceived expectations of employer and motivation to comply with perceived expectations of employer; e f f i c a c y expectations and i n f l u e n c e of e f f i c a c y expectations on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; educational e f f i c a c y expectations and i n f l u e n c e of educational e f f i c a c y expectations on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l ; s u i t a b i l i t y of time and i n f l u e n c e of s u i t a b i l i t y of time on d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l . F i n a l l y , p e r t i n e n t socio-demographic and educational data were c o l l e c t e d . The d i s c u s s i o n of the processes involved in the instrument development are presented i n the f o l l o w i n g order: determination of d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s (expressive and i n s t r u m e n t a l ) , and refinement of d r a f t quest ionnai re. 180 Determination of Desired Objectives Expressive Object ives Beginning with the set of 15 expressive o b j e c t i v e s Marcus (1976) developed, the f o l l o w i n g were deleted from the l i s t for the reasons i n d i c a t e d a f t e r each o b j e c t i v e (see Table 2) for d i s t r i b u t i o n of judges' r e a c t i o n s r e l a t i v e to each o b j e c t i v e ) : Objective 9: To escape an unhappy r e l a t i o n s h i p by having something i n p a r t i c u l a r to do with my time. Comment: Although the 10 judges c l e a r l y f e l t that t h i s o b j e c t i v e belonged to the expressive category with 8 c l a s s i f y i n g i t under that s e c t i o n Without Doubt and 2 With Doubt; i t was nonetheless r e j e c t e d because 6 of the 7 judges who cooperated i n the foll o w up interview conducted at the time the r a t i n g sheets were c o l l e c t e d expressed discomfort with the o b j e c t i v e noting that the item was not i n good t a s t e , hence the d e c i s i o n to drop i t despite i t s r e l a t i v e high r a t i n g . O bjective 15: To share a common i n t e r e s t i n the subject with one or more other people (such as spouse or f r i e n d s ) who are studying the same subject at the sametime. Comment: Eight of the 10 judges c l a s s i f i e d the item as belonging to the S a t i s f a c t i o n Now category Without Doubt; one other p a n e l i s t assigned i t to the same category but With Doubt, while another f e l t i t was Ambiguous. Further d i s c u s s i o n s with seven of the 181 Objective 19: Comment: Objective 23: Comment: Objective 25: Comment: judges revealed that four of them who had c l a s s i f i e d i t as being Without Doubt an expressive o b j e c t i v e , noted that they as respondents would have prefered not to have to answer the question because they f e l t that somehow i t s meaning was not very c l e a r given the context of the present study. Thus they pointed out that the chances of that being a per t i n e n t o b j e c t i v e that w i l l s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e the enrollment d e c i s i o n of p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s was probably n e g l i g i b l e . The o b j e c t i v e was el i m i n a t e d a c c o r d i n g l y . To achieve the t h r i l l of mastering the p a r t i c u l a r subject or s k i l l taught i n t h i s course or program. This o b j e c t i v e had one ambiguous r a t i n g which from the outset precluded i t s i n c l u s i o n . The d e c i s i o n to d i s c a r d i t was f u r t h e r strengthened by the fa c t that although f i v e of the judges rated i t Without Doubt under S a t i s f a c t i o n Now, the other four rated i t under the same category but With Doubt. To attend because i t i s what I am being paid to do. Five of the judges rated t h i s item as being Ambiguous while one other j u r i s t c l a s s i f i e d i t under S a t i s f a c t i o n Now with some r e s e r v a t i o n s . This o b j e c t i v e was deleted without f u r t h e r examination. To do something, such as read, w r i t e , experiment, or e x e r c i s e , that I l i k e to do. Although seven of the experts c l a s s i f i e d t h i s 182 o b j e c t i v e under S a t i s f a c t i o n Now, with one other c l a s s i f y i n g i t i n the same category With Doubt, two other judges f e l t that i t was Ambiguous. The inadequacy of t h i s item was f u r t h e r underscored i n the subsequent follow-up d i s c u s s i o n s as the seven judges interviewed were on the whole not favorably disposed to the o b j e c t i v e given as i t was that i t had four d i s t i n c t a c t i v i t i e s which could negate any meaningful i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The item was el i m i n a t e d . Objective 27: To k i l l time which I don't know what to do with otherwi se. Comment: Despite i t s high r a t i n g s with 9 of the judges designating i t as belonging Without Doubt under the S a t i s f a c t i o n Now category, with one other j u r i s t c l a s s i f y i n g i t i n the same domain With Doubt, the o b j e c t i v e was nonetheless discarded because s i x of the seven judges interviewed thought the item was not in good t a s t e . They contended that the eventual subjects of the study were p r o f e s s i o n a l s for whom i t would be hardly appropriate to suggest that not knowing what to do with t h e i r time was a meaningful c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n making t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n . The o b j e c t i v e was dropped. Objective 29: To search for t r u t h . Comment: This item was on the whole seen by the judges to be rather vague, hence four of the experts rated i t as 183 Ambiguous, three others c l a s s i f i e d i t under S a t i s f a c t i o n Now, but With Doubt, while the remaining three j u r i s t s assigned i t to the same category Without Doubt. This item was dropped. The r e j e c t i o n of o b j e c t i v e s 9, 15, 19, 23, 25, 27 and 29 (see Table 2) meant that the set of expressive o b j e c t i v e s were short of the required 10 by two. Consequently two more o b j e c t i v e s were added namely: "enable me to break the routine of work" derived from the s p l i t t i n g i n t o two of o b j e c t i v e 21; and " v i s i t Vancouver" derived from the l i s t of 10 o b j e c t i v e s which the organizers of the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c suggested could be s i g n i f i c a n t i n the enrollment d e c i s i o n making of p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s . Consequently, the f o l l o w i n g 10 o b j e c t i v e s q u a l i f i e d for i n c l u s i o n i n the set of ten expressive o b j e c t i v e s used i n the instrument which was p i l o t t e s t e d : 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to l e a r n for the sake of l e a r n i n g . 2. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y about the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n the programs. 3. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to prove to myself that I am 1 84 capable of l e a r n i n g the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n the programs. 4. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to become a better informed person i n adu l t education. 5. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to enjoy i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . 6. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to f u l f i l l a need to be with other people. 7. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l give me the opportunity to v i s i t Vancouver. 8. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to break the routine of home. 9. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to break the routine of work. 10. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to engage in an a c t i v i t y which I p a r t i c u l a r l y enjoy. Instrumental Objectives L i k e the expressive o b j e c t i v e s , the set of instrumental o b j e c t i v e s (Marcus 1976) were a l s o subjected to the same screening process with the f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t s : Objective 10: To get ready for a government examination i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d . Comment: Despite i t s high r a t i n g as an o b j e c t i v e belonging to 185 Objective 12: Comment: Objective 16; Comment: a S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with 9 of the 10 judges c l a s s i f y i n g i t a c c o r d i n g l y , the fa c t that one of the judges f e l t that i t was Ambiguous c a l l e d the o b j e c t i v e i n t o question. The d e c i s i o n to drop the item from the set was f u r t h e r supported i n subsequent d i s c u s s i o n s with seven of the judges who unanimously pointed out that the item was i r r e l e v a n t in the context of the present study as no such p o l i c y e x i s t s . The item was acc o r d i n g l y discarded. To catch up to others, such as my spouse, f r i e n d s , r e l a t i v e s , business a s s o c i a t e s or competitors. A l l ten judges c l a s s i f i e d o b j e c t i v e 12 under the S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with eight doing so Without Doubt and two With Doubt. The item was however discarded because three of the j u r i s t s pointed out that the program was not designed to achieve such goals and so p o t e n t i a l e n r o l l e e s with such competitive ambitions w i l l seek enrollment i n other forms of c r e d i t o r i e n t e d p r o v i s i o n s . This view was supported by four of the other judges. To q u a l i f y for membership i n a group I want to j o i n . A l l ten judges c l a s s i f i e d item 16 as belonging to S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with eight of them doing so Without Doubt and two With Doubt. In the ensuing follow-up d i s c u s s i o n s however, f i v e of the experts noted that the item lacked s p e c i f i c i t y when given a second thought as i t does not i n d i c a t e the group 186 being r e f e r e d t o . Furthermore, no such p o l i c y e x i s t s i n the p r a c t i c e of adult education. The item was consequently deleted from the s e t . To get accepted by others who w i l l respect me more provided I l e a r n the subject or s k i l l taught i n t h i s course or program. Although a l l ten j u r i s t s assigned o b j e c t i v e 20 to the S a t i s f a c t i o n Later domain with seven of them doing so Without Doubt and three With Doubt, i t was nonetheless e l i m i n a t e d as a l l seven of the judges interviewed observed that i t was not a relevant item in the circumstance i n which t h i s study was undertaken. Making t h e i r point f u r t h e r , they noted that there were no adult education p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies known to them for which membership was contingent upon having undertaken a course. To learn about new things to t a l k about. Eight of the e v a l u a t i n g p a n e l i s t s c l a s s i f i e d o b j e c t i v e 22 under the S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with f i v e of them doing so Without Doubt and three With Doubt. While t h i s r a t i n g was weak as i t was, the f a c t that two other judges considered i t Ambiguous, r e s u l t e d i n i t s r e j e c t i o n . Besides i t s ambiguity, other judges noted that the item was too vague to q u a l i f y as a meaningful o b j e c t i v e . To learn to make my p o s i t i o n i n l i f e more secure. Eight of the experts c l a s s i f i e d the o b j e c t i v e under 187 S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with seven of them doing so Without Doubt and one With Doubt. Two other r a t e r s however considered the item Ambiguous which d i s q u a l i f i e d i t from i n c l u s i o n in the s e t . O b j e c t i v e 30: To prepare myself b e t t e r so that I can escape the f r u s t r a t i o n s of the way I l i v e now. Comment: Nine of the experts rated o b j e c t i v e 30 as belonging to S a t i s f a c t i o n Later category with eight of them doing so Without Doubt and one With Doubt. One other expert, however, considered the item Ambiguous which e l i m i n a t e d i t from i n c l u s i o n i n the s e t . Summary: The r e j e c t i o n of o b j e c t i v e s 10, 12, 16, 20, 22, 28 and 30 (see Table 2) meant that the set of instrumental o b j e c t i v e s were short of the required 10 by two. As a r e s u l t two more o b j e c t i v e s were added namely: "give me an opportunity to make contacts for p o s s i b l e job openings;" and "give me an opportunity to r e f l e c t on my p r a c t i c e " which were derived from the l i s t of o b j e c t i v e s the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c organizers b e l i e v e d could be important in i n f l u e n c i n g p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Consequently, the f o l l o w i n g 10 o b j e c t i v e s q u a l i f i e d for i n c l u s i o n i n the set of ten instrumental o b j e c t i v e s used in the questionnaire which was p i l o t t e s t e d : 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to secure advancement in my 188 present job or occupational career. 2. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l help . me in other educational courses which I intend to take. 3. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l prepare me to be able to serve others i n a p a r t i c u l a r way. 4. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to car r y out a step in a plan I have made for myself aimed at achieving a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . 5. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to improve my general a b i l i t y to serve mankind. 6. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to maintain or improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have 7. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to increase my competence to achieve my goals. 8. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l enable me to lea r n the subjects or s k i l l s taught, i n the programs so that I w i l l be able e v e n t u a l l y to share a common i n t e r e s t with other persons. 9. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua 1981 w i l l give me an opportunity to make contacts f or 189 p o s s i b l e job openings. 10. P a r t i c i p a t i o n in Chautauqua 1981 w i l l give me an opportunity to r e f l e c t on my p r a c t i c e now. Ref inement of the Draft Quest ionnai re To f u r t h e r improve the c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t y of the instrument, the judges, f o l l o w i n g t h e i r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the 30 o b j e c t i v e s i n t o s a t i s f a c t i o n now and s a t i s f a c t i o n l a t e r c a t e g o r i e s , were each fu r t h e r presented with a ten s e c t i o n q u e s t i o n a i r e made up of 25 pages, with the o b j e c t i v e s used being the same 30 they had e a r l i e r considered. Each judge's instrument was accompanied by a "Questionnaire E v a l u a t i o n Sheet" (Appendix A) whose purpose was to communicate to the j u r i s t s the i n s t r u c t i o n s contained t h e r e i n . Each judge was f u r t h e r advised to ignore the layout of the "Questionnaire E v a l u a t i o n Sheet" r e f e r e d to e a r l i e r and a c t u a l l y make h i s observations on the instrument i t s e l f alongside those items that each considered needed f u r t h e r examination and to o f f e r a l t e r n a t i v e suggestions i f p o s s i b l e . This approach proved to be convenient to the judges as they were able to make t h e i r observations d i r e c t l y as they encountered any issue they considered awkward and to which they wanted to draw a t t e n t i o n . S i m i l a r l y , the i n v e s t i g a t o r found the strategy q u i t e u s e f u l as i t f a c i l i t a t e d easy reference and hence c o r r e c t i o n s of issues r a i s e d by experts a f t e r due d i s c u s s i o n with the s p e c i f i c j u r i s t , and c o n s u l t a t i o n with the other judges. 190 O r i g i n a l Questionnaire Layout The composite que s t i o n n a i r e at t h i s stage comprised of Section I through VI designed to measure each of the v a r i a b l e s of the two models (expressive and in s t r u m e n t a l ) . Sections i through I I I measured expectancy, valence and importance r e s p e c t i v e l y r e l a t i v e to 15 expressive o b j e c t i v e s in each instance. Sections IV through VI measured i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y , valence and importance r e s p e c t i v e l y r e l a t i v e to 15 instrumental o b j e c t i v e s i n each instance. The 30 o b j e c t i v e s were the same as those the experts had ca t e g o r i z e d e a r l i e r . While expectancy, i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y and valence were measured on a 7-point scale ranging from 0 to 6, importance was measured on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 to 4. Section VII which was designated as "Extent of Perceived S o c i a l Influences on Decision to E n r o l l " , was designed to measure a respondents' perception of h i s f r i e n d s , family and employers' expectations regarding h i s p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c and h i s motivation to comply with those perceived expectations. While the perceived expectations of f r i e n d s , f a m i l y , and employer were each measured on a 7-point scale ranging from 0 through 6, the motivation to comply with the perceived expectations of each of the s i g n i f i c a n t others was measured as importance on a 5-point s c a l e ranging from 0 through 4. Section V I I I was l a b e l e d "General" i n which information was sought regarding the extent to which an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of some personal and environmental f a c t o r s such as educational e f f i c a c y , educational e f f i c a c y expectation and s u i t a b i l i t y of scheduled time of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r 191 enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Educational e f f i c a c y and educational e f f i c a c y expectation were measured on a 5-point s c a l e ranging from 0 through 4 i n c l u d i n g the degree of i n f l u e n c e respondents' b e l i e f s regarding these c o n s t r u c t s as they r e l a t e to them, had on t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Suitableness of the scheduled time of the Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c was measured as a dichotomous v a r i a b l e , yes/no; while the extent to which respondent's response e i t h e r yes/no inf l u e n c e d t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making was measured on a 5-point scale 0 through 4. Section IX which was t i t l e d " A d d i t i o n a l General Information", was designed to obtain the f o l l o w i n g information: i ) Obtaining socio-demographic and educational data on each respondent; i i ) Obtaining each respondent's opinion regarding the fees charged for the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c , as w e l l as i i i ) A s c e r t a i n i n g whether or not each respondent had f r i e n d s , f a m i l y , and employer. The information regarding whether or not each respondent had the aforementioned s i g n i f i c a n t others was designed to counter check the relevance of t h e i r responses to the questions on Section VII regarding t h e i r perception of t h e i r f r i e n d ' s , family and employer's expectations about t h e i r d e c i s i o n to e n r o l l and how that perception i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n making. To a s c e r t a i n the extent to which the 30 o b j e c t i v e s were comprehensive enough with regard embodying the dominant concerns which e n r o l l e e s and non-enrollees to Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981 1 92 would a s p i r e to achieve w i t h i n , or consequent upon engaging i n the educational experience, i t was considered u s e f u l to accord respondents the opportunity to i n d i c a t e o b j e c t i v e s or other f a c t o r s that i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r enrollment d e c i s i o n which were not included in the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The i n t e n t i o n was to include items so enumerated i n the f i n a l instrument depending on the extent to which any given o b j e c t i v e was mentioned across subjects during the p i l o t t e s t and to d i s c a r d the s e c t i o n t h e r e a f t e r . Hence s e c t i o n X was t i t l e d "Unique Reasons for P a r t i c i p a t i o n . " Judges' E v a l u a t i o n of Questionnaire. As i t was, the judges encountered the o b j e c t i v e s they had pr e v i o u s l y d i s c r i m i n a t e d i n t o s a t i s f a c t i o n now and l a t e r c a t e g o r i e s in the form of a composite q u e s t i o n n a i r e . An examination of the comments made by the j u r i s t s showed that they accomplished the f o l l o w i n g t a s k s : re-emphasized t h e i r previous observations regarding the degree of belongingness of items to a s p e c i f i c category i n a d d i t i o n to the relevance and ta s t e of i n d i v i d u a l o b j e c t i v e s ; r e i n d i c a t e d t h e i r concern where they considered an item had expressed more than one idea; and they performed a h o l i s t i c examination of the 1 0 s e c t i o n q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n terms of the degree to which the instrument "hung" together as a u n i t . These three issues are discussed in turn . The d i s c u s s i o n regarding the f i r s t task, namely the high degree with which each judge underscored the observations he had made with regard to the belongingness of each o b j e c t i v e to e i t h e r the expressive or instrumental s e t ; relevance of each o b j e c t i v e to the context of the study and the extent to which they considered 193 each o b j e c t i v e to be i n good t a s t e ; w i l l not be repeated. The issues they r a i s e d were on the whole a r e p l i c a t i o n of questions they had r a i s e d e a r l i e r , these issues have been given d e t a i l e d e x p o s i t i o n p r e v i o u s l y . The judges shed f u r t h e r l i g h t with regard to the development of the instrument on two new dimensions namely, the s p e c i f i c i t y with which each item expressed one idea and the o v e r a l l consistancy of the instrument. The presentation of the judges' r e a c t i o n s regarding the s p e c i f i c i t y with which each item expressed one idea w i l l be discussed i n the f o l l o w i n g order beginning with the expressive o b j e c t i v e s , and then the instrumental o b j e c t i v e s . In the set of expressive o b j e c t i v e s , numbers 3, 7, 11, and 17 (Table 2). were questioned e i t h e r for expressing m u l t i p l e ideas or lack of c l a r i t y . Consequently the f o l l o w i n g amendments were made. Objective 3: To s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y about the.subject taught i n t h i s course or program. Comments: Seven of the judges pointed out that "course or program" were two concepts that could mean a number of things depending on whom one was t a l k i n g t o . Hence they recommended that only one concept be used as t h i s w i l l enhance meaningfulness to respondents, as w e l l as f a c i l i t a t e more pointed data i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Consequently "course" was dropped and "program", as used i n the brochures mailed out to p o t e n t i a l Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c p a r t i c i p a n t s was adopted. The item now read, "to s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y about the subjects or s k i l l s taught i n the 194 programs." To learn about the subject taught i n t h i s course or program for i t s own sake. Besides r a i s i n g the issue regarding the confusion that tend to surround the use of the terms course or program already r e f e r e d t o , f i v e of the judges noted that the o b j e c t i v e was too s i m i l a r to item (1) "learn for the sake of l e a r n i n g . " Hence two of the judges and the w r i t e r proposed the f o l l o w i n g o b j e c t i v e "to become a better informed person about adult education." This was considered by a l l judges to be more i n tune with the s p i r i t of the educational experience that was the subject of concern. The new o b j e c t i v e replaced the former number 7. To enjoy the sensation of i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . Some of the judges wanted the phrase "the sensation of" deleted. This was done and the item then read "to enjoy i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y " . To learn something or engage in an a c t i v i t y which I p a r t i c u l a r l y enjoy. This item was queried because the judges pointed out that "to l e a r n something" or "engage i n an a c t i v i t y " d i d not mean the same t h i n g . Hence i t was decided to d i s c a r d the l a t t e r phrase and r e t a i n the item which then read "to engage i n an a c t i v i t y which I p a r t i c u l a r l y enjoy." 195 Object ive 21: Comment: To break the routine of home and work. I t was noted that t h i s o b j e c t i v e contained two d i s t i n c t concepts namely "home" and "work". Judges f u r t h e r observed that i t would be i n t e r e s t i n g to f i n d out the nature -of the s i g n i f i c a n c e of each concept in enrollment d e c i s i o n making. Consequently, both items were re t a i n e d but reformulated i n t o two separate o b j e c t i v e s namely "to break the routine of work" and "to break the routine of home". As with t h e i r response to the set of expressive o b j e c t i v e s , the judges f e l t that the set of instrumental o b j e c t i v e s s p e c i f i c a l l y numbers 2 and 18 required f u r t h e r t i d y i n g up. In t h i s regard, the f o l l o w i n g amendments were made. Objective 2: To secure advancement in my present job or occupational career. Comment: I t was suggested that the item be made to read "enable me to advance i n my present occupational career." This was condidered to be c l e a r e r with the added advantage of having e l i m i n a t e d the a l t e r n a t i v e of "job or occupation" which may for d i f f e r e n t i n d i v i d u a l s c a r r y varying connotations obscuring the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the data. The amendment was acco r d i n g l y made. Objective 18: To maintain or improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have. Comment: This was simply r e s t r u c t u r e d to read "enable me to 1 96 improve the s o c i a l p o s i t i o n that I have" thus minimizing the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of dual meanings suggested by the a l t e r n a t i v e concept of "maintain". The c r i t i c a l examination of the instrument i n terms of consistency l e d a l l of the judges to r a i s e three p o i n t s : a) the p r o h i b i t i v e length of the qu e s t i o n n a i r e ; b) the d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l i n g ; and c) the o v e r a l l layout. With regard to each area i n which they expressed concern, they made a number of u s e f u l suggestions which were f u l l y u t i l i z e d . a. On the question of length, the judges expressed concern that the 25-page, t e n - s e c t i o n questionnaire could prove p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y p r o h i b i t i v e and thus might a f f e c t the response r a t e . They suggested c u t t i n g down in t r o d u c t o r y explanations given that the intended subjects of the study by v i r t u e of t h e i r r e l a t i v e l y high educational backgrounds might f i n d over-extended i n t r o d u c t o r y explanations superfluous. b) R a i s i n g the issue of d i f f e r e n t i a l s c a l i n g , they cautioned that besides the question of r e l i a b i l i t y , the lack of un i f o r m i t y of s c a l i n g might present formidable a n a l y t i c a l problems with the data. To achieve t h i s u n i f o r m i t y the d e c i s i o n was made to measure a l l items on a 5-point scale ranging from 0 through 4. c) With regard to the layout format, the judges noted that i t was u s u a l l y h e l p f u l to arrange the sec t i o n s 1 97 in such a way as to lead the respondents i n t o the flow of the que s t i o n n a i r e g r a d u a l l y such that before they r e a l i z e d i t , to quote one of the judges, "they are hooked" i n t o completing the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . This suggestion was adopted and i n the ensuing r e o r g a n i z a t i o n s e c t i o n s V I I , V I I I and IX, the Extent of Perceived S o c i a l Influences on Decision to E n r o l l ; General; and A d d i t i o n a l General Information r e s p e c t i v e l y became Sections I , I I , and I I I i n the rev i s e d v e r s i o n . While former s e c t i o n s I , I I , I I I , IV, V, and VI namely Degree of C e r t a i n t y of Achieving Objectives as a Result of P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the 1981 Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c ; the Degree of D e s i r a b i l i t y of Achieving O b j e c t i v e s ; Importance of Objectives i n Enrollment D e c i s i o n ; I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y of P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Achieving Other Ob j e c t i v e s ; The Degree of D e s i r a b i l i t y of Achieving O b j e c t i v e s ; and Importance of Objectives i n Enrollment Decision became Sections IV, V, VI, V I I , V I I I , and XI r e s p e c t i v e l y . Section X, Unique Reasons for P a r t i c i p a t i n g , r e t a i n e d i t s place. Taken together, the e l i m i n a t i o n of ten o b j e c t i v e s ( f i v e expressive and f i v e i n s t r u m e n t a l ) ; the reduction i n the in t r o d u c t o r y explanations; the uniform s c a l i n g and the change of layout; considerably improved the flow of the questionnaire and brought about a reduction i n the number of pages 198 from 25 to 18. Further Refinement of Draft Questionnaire The r e v i s e d questionnaire was f u r t h e r brought under intense s c r u t i n y by members of the author's d i s s e r t a t i o n committee at a meeting f o l l o w i n g the completion of phase I I . During the ensuing d e l i b e r a t i o n s , f u r t h e r suggestions were made to improve the q u a l i t y of the instrument i n the f o l l o w i n g areas namely, 1) i n t r o d u c t o r y remarks, i i ) l a y o u t , and i i i ) s c a l i n g . 1) H i t h e r t o , each of the o b j e c t i v e s was introduced with " P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Chautauqua by the P a c i f i c 1981 w i l l enable me t o . . . " , t h i s meant that t h i s i n t r o d u c t o r y phrase was repeated 60 times because each of the two models expresive and instrumental had three components with each component having ten o b j e c t i v e s . To reduce t h i s r e p e t i t i v e n e s s which was c o n t r i b u t i n g to the length of the instrument, i t was suggested that each set of o b j e c t i v e s be p r e f i x e d ones with the phrase in repect of each of the s i x c o n s t r u c t s . This meant that the i n t r o d u c t o r y phrase now appeared s i x times instead of 60. i i ) With regard to the layout, i t was suggested that s e c t i o n I I I p e r t a i n i n g to socio-demographic data become Section I while former Sections I and II be c o l l a p s e d to become Section II with the new t i t l e "Extent of Perceived S o c i a l Influences on Decision to E n r o l l " . Consequent upon t h i s readjustment, 199 former Sections IV through X now became Sections I I I through IX. i i i ) On the question of s c a l i n g , i t was suggested that the scales should range from 1 through 5 instead of from 0 through 4 since most people tend to a s s o c i a t e a zero with nothingness. In a d d i t i o n , the point was made that there was no need to l a b e l each i n t e r v a l on the s c a l e s . Rather i t was suggested that once the l a b e l l i n g was done i n respect of the f i r s t s c a l e , subsequent scales i n the same set should only have i d e n t i c a l numbers as the f i r s t . The instrument, a f t e r undergoing t h i s t h i r d r e v i s i o n , was again given to a l l three of the judges from the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Centre for Continuing Education, one professor from the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia D i v i s i o n of Adult Education and a second year d o c t o r a l student i n adult education, a l l f i v e being members of the o r i g i n a l panel of 10 judges, for f u r t h e r review. With no judge suggesting any f u r t h e r amendments, the instrument as presented i n Appendix B was p i l o t t e s t e d . D i r e c t ions f o r Judges Panel ^-j rev Now/Later Judgements JlJLj'KS On the accompanying sheets a r e 30 "reasons" people g i v e f o r e n r o l l i n g i n s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l programs. Each r e a s o n i s e s s e n t i a l l y a statement of the k i n d of s a t i s f a c t i o n the i n d i v i d u a l i s s e e k i n g to a t t a i n . Sometimes the s a t i s f a c t i o n o c c u r s mainly wh i1e the educat i ona1 exper i ence i s go i ng on. At o t h e r times, t h e r e seems to be l i t t l e i f any s a t i s f a c t i o n a n t i c i p a t e d d u r i n g the s p e c i f i c e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e ; Instead t h e - s a t i s f a c t ion i s e x p e c t e d a f t e r the  educat i ona1 exper i ence has ended. At o t h e r times, the reason does not suggest when the a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n i s e x p e c t e d t o o c c u r . Such s t a t e m e n t s a r e ambiguous. I n s t r u c t i o n : C l a s s i f y each of the 30 reasons as i n d i c a t i n g s a t i s f a c t i o n e i t h e r NOW, w h i l e the e d u c a t i o n 1s g o i n g on, or LATER, a f t e r It has ended. T r y not t o r e a d a n y t h i n g Into the statement, but c o n s i d e r the words j u s t as they s t a n d . If the words imply s a t i s f a c t i o n BOTH now and l a t e r , o r i f they p r o v i d e no c l u e at a l l as to when the s a t i s f a c t i o n i s expected, c l a s s i f y the reason as AMBIGUOUS. Note t h a t you a r e a l s o asked to s e l e c t a l e v e l of c e r t a i n t y c o n c e r n i n g each NOW and LATER judgment--(a) WITHOUT DOUBT and (b) WITH DOUBT. WITHOUT DOUBT means t h a t you are u n c e r t a i n about your c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the item. AMBIGUOUS means t h a t you a r e a l t o g e t h e r u n a b l e to c l a s s i f y the item e i t h e r way. NOW-LATER SATISFACTION RATING SHEET Reason f o r E n r o l l i n g Sat i s f a c t 1 on NOW Wl thout Doubt With Doubt Sat 1 s f a c t i o n LATER Wi thout Doubt With Doubt AMBIGUOUS T o t a l Doubt 3 . To l e a r n j u s t f o r the sake of l e a r n i n g . To s e c u r e advancement i n my p r e s e n t job or o c c u p a t i o n a l c a r e e r . To s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y about the s u b j e c t taught i n t h i s c o u r s e or program. 4. To a c q u i r e knowledge or s k i l l s t h a t w i l l h e l p me i n o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l c o u r s e s which I i n t e n d to take. 5. To p r o v e to myself t h a t I am c a p a b l e of l e a r n i n g the s u b j e c t or s k i l l taught 1n t h i s c o u r s e or program. 6. To p r e p a r e myself to be a b l e to s e r v e o t h e r s 1n a p a r t i c u l a r way. 20I R e a s o n f o r E n r o l l i n g S a t 1 s f NO a c t i o n tl S a t i s f LAT a c t i o n ER AMB IGUOUS W1 t h o u t D o u b t Wi t h D o u b t Wi t h o u t D o u b t Wi t h D o u b t T o t a l D o u b t 7 . T o l e a r n a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t t a u g h t i n t h i s c o u r s e o r p r o g r a m f o r i t s own s a k e . 8 . T o c a r r y o u t a s t e p i n a p l a n I h a v e made f o r m y s e l f a i m e d a t a c h i e v i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . 9 . T o e s c a p e a n u n h a p p y r e l a t i o n s h i p b y h a v i n g s o m e t h i n g i n p a r t i c u l a r t o d o w i t h my t i m e . 1 0 . T o g e t r e a d y f o r a g o v e r n m e n t e x a m i n a t i o n i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d . 1 1 . T o e n j o y t h e s e n s a t i o n o f i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . 12 . T o c a t c h u p t o o t h e r s , s u c h a s my s p o u s e , f r i e n d s , r e l a t i v e s , b u s i n e s s a s s o c i a t e s o r c o m p e t i t o r s . 1 3 . T o f u l f i l l a n e e d t o b e w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e . 14 . T o i m p r o v e my g e n e r a l a b i l i t y t o s e r v e m a n k i n d . 1 5 . T o s h a r e a common I n t e r e s t i n t h e s u b j e c t w i t h o n e o r m o r e o t h e r p e o p l e ( s u c h a s s p o u s e o r f r i e n d s ) who a r e s t u d y i n g t h e same s u b j e c t a t t h e same t i m e . 1 6 . T o q u a l i f y f o r m e m b e r s h i p i n a g r o u p I wan t t o j o i n . 1 7 . T o l e a r n s o m e t h i n g o r e n g a g e 1n a n a c t i v i t y w h i c h I p a r t i c u l a r l y e n j o y . 1 8 . T o m a i n t a i n o r i m p r o v e t h e s o c i a l p o s i t i o n t h a t I h a v e . 2.0Z R e a s o n f o r E n r o l l i n g S a t i s f a c t i o n NOW S a t i s f a c t i o n L A T E R AMBIGUOUS W i t h o u t D o u b t Wi t h D o u b t Wi t h o u t D o u b t Wi t h D o u b t T o t a l D o u b t 1 9 . T o a c h i e v e t h e t h r i l l o f m a s t e r i n g t h e p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t o r s k i l l t a u g h t 1n t h i s c o u r s e o r p r o g r a m . 2 0 . T o g e t a c c e p t e d b y o t h e r s who w i l l r e s p e c t me m o r e p r o v i d e d I l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t o r s k i l l t a u g h t 1n t h i s c o u r s e o r p r o g r a m . 2 1 . T o b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f home o r w o r k . 2 2 . T o l e a r n new t h i n g s t o t a l k a b o u t . 2 3 . T o a t t e n d b e c a u s e t h a t i s w h a t I am b e i n g p a i d t o d o . 2 4 . T o I n c r e a s e my c o m p e t e n c e t o a c h i e v e my g o a l s . 2 5 . T o d o s o m e t h i n g , s u c h a s r e a d , w r i t e , e x p e r i m e n t , o r e x e r c i s e , t h a t I 1 I k e t o d o . 2 6 . T o l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t o r s k i l l s t a u g h t 1n t h i s c o u r s e o r p r o g r a m s o t h a t I w i l l b e a b l e e v e n t u a l l y t o s h a r e a common I n t e r e s t w i t h o t h e r p e r s o n s . 2 7 . T o k i l l t i m e w h i c h I d o n ' t know w h a t t o d o w i t h o t h e r w i s e . 2 8 . T o l e a r n t o m a k e my p o s i t i o n i n l i f e m o r e s e c u r e . 2 9 . T o s e a r c h f o r t r u t h . 3 0 . T o p r e p a r e m y s e l f b e t t e r s o t h a t I c a n e s c a p e t h e f r u s t r a t i o n s o f t h e way I l i v e now. Q u e s t 1 o n n a t r e E v a 1 u a t t o n S h e e t 103 P l e a s e a t t e m p t t o a n s w e r t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s e i t h e r o n t h e p a p e r o r 1n y o u r m i n d : I f y o u f e e l y o u c a n a n s w e r a n I t e m w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n i n g wha t t h e w o r d s m e a n , p l a c e a c h e c k - m a r k ( ) b e s i d e t h e I t em 1n t h e c o l u m n h e a d e d " A L L C L E A R " . I f t h e u s e o f c e r t a i n w o r d s 1n t h e I t e m b o t h e r s y o u , c i r c l e t h e t r o u b l e s o m e w o r d s a n d c h e c k t h e a p p r o p r i a t e o n e o f t h e t w o c o l u m n s h e a d e d " D O N ' T UNDERSTAND C I R C L E D WORDS" a n d " F I N D C I R C L E D WORDS O B J E C T I O N A B L E " . <i. I f y o u f i n d t h e q u e s t i o n t o t a l l y u n c l e a r , c h e c k t h e "AMB IGUOUS " c o l u m n . Work a s q u i c k l y a s y o u c a n . A f t e r y o u h a v e e v a l u a t e d t h e i t e m s 1n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e a b o v e d i r e c t i o n s , 1f y o u h a v e a n y t i m e l e f t a n d y o u w i s h t o s u g g e s t a b e t t e r way o f w o r d i n g a n y o f t h e i t e m s , g o a h e a d a n d a l t e r t h e m . Q U E S T I O N S A L L C L E A R D O N ' T UNDERSTAND C I R C L E D WORDS F IND C I R C L E D WORDS O B J E C T I O N A B L E AMB IGUOUS APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE PACKAGE MAILED TO RESPONDENTS 1 2.1 ° S E C T I O N I GENERAL INFORMAT ION 1 a . What 1s y o u r a g e ? y e a r s b . What i s y o u r s e x ? _ _ _ _ m a l e f e m a l e 2. How d i d y o u c o m e t o know a b o u t C h a u t a u q u a 198 1? J o u r n a l N e w s l e t t e r T h r o u g h a r e s o u r c e p e r s o n i n a p r o g r a m y o u a t t e n d e d F l y e r M a i l e d b r o c h u r e P a s t a c q u a i n t a n c e w i t h C h a u t a u q u a F r i e n d C o l l e a g u e C a n ' t r e m e m b e r O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) 3 . What i s t h e h i g h e s t e d u c a t i o n a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n y o u h o l d ? (CHECK ONLY O N E ) U n i v e r s i t y d e g r e e a n d some o t h e r t e r t i a r y q u a l i f i c a t i o n ( e . g . , B . A . a n d T e a c h e r ' s C e r t i f i c a t e ) U n i v e r s i t y d e g r e e o n l y P a r t i a l l y c o m p l e t e d u n i v e r s i t y d e g r e e O t h e r t e r t i a r y q u a l i f i c a t i o n ( e . g . . n u r s i n g q u a l i f i c a t i o n , t r a d e c e r t i f i c a t e , m a n a g e m e n t d i p l o m a , e t c . ) H i g h s c h o o l g r a d u a t i o n No f o r m a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n O t h e r q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) 4 . A b o u t how l o n g a g o i s i t s i n c e y o u l a s t p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m ? L e s s t h a n 1 y e a r 1 t o 2 y e a r s 3 t o 5 y e a r s 6 t o 10 y e a r s 11 t o 20 y e a r s 21 t o 30 y e a r s M o r e t h a n 30 y e a r s D o n ' t know 5. What i s y o u r o p i n i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e f e e s c h a r g e d f o r C h a u t a u q u a 1981? ( c h e c k o n e ) E x t r e m e l y h i g h V e r y h i g h H i g h J u s t r i g h t Low V e r y l o w . E x t r e m e l y l ow S. H a d y o u r o p i n i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e f e e s c h a r g e d a n y t h i n g t o d o w i t h y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? E x t r e m e l y i m p o r t a n t V e r y i m p o r t a n t I m p o r t a n t _ _ U n i m p o r t a n t 7 . Who w o u l d b e p a y i n g f o r y o u t o a t t e n d s h o u l d y o u d e c i d e t o p a r t i c i p a t e ? S e l f E m p l o y e r O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) 8 a . Do y o u h a v e f r i e n d s w i t h whom y o u m i g h t d i s c u s s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a ? Y e s No 8 b . I f y e s , d o y o u r f r i e n d s g e n e r a l l y i n f l u e n c e y o u r d e c i s i o n s ? Y e s No 9 a . Do y o u h a v e c l o s e c o n t a c t w i t h f a m i l y m e m b e r s ( e . g . , s p o u s e , b r o t h e r s , s i s t e r s , c h i l d r e n , p a r e n t s , a u n t s , u n c l e s , e t c . ) ? Y e s No 9 b . I f y e s , d o m e m b e r s o f y o u r f a m i l y i n f l u e n c e y o u r d e c i s i o n s ? Y e s No 1 0 . P l e a s e i n d i c a t e y o u r e m p l o y m e n t s t a t u s : U n e m p l o y e d S e l f - e m p l o y e d E m p l o y e d b y a n o r g a n i z a t i o n S E C T I O N II EXTENT OF P E R C E I V E D S O C I A L I N F L U E N C E S ON D E C I S I O N TO ENROLL T h i s s e c t i o n i s d e s i g n e d t o m e a s u r e t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e d y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n . F R I E N D S C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E 1a . Y o u r f r i e n d s ' p a r t i c i p a t i o n a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i s : y o u r p o s s i b l e V e r y D i s c o u r a g 1 n g D i s c o u r a g i n g I n d i f f e r e n t E n c o u r a g i n g 5 V e r y E n c o u r a g i n g 1 b . T o w h a t e x t e n t d i d y o u r f r i e n d s ' a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g y o u r p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i n f l u e n c e d y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? 1 S t r o n g N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s 1 1 i v e I n f 1 u e n c e F A M I L Y 2 a . Y o u r f a m i l y ' s a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g y o u r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i s : p o s s i b 1 e V e r y D i s c o u r a g i n g D i s c o u r a g i n g I n d i f f e r e n t E n c o u r a g i n g 5 V e r y E n c o u r a g i n g 2 b . T o w h a t e x t e n t d i d y o u r p e r c e p t i o n o f y o u r f a m i l y s ' a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g y o u r i n t e n t i o n t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i n f l u e n c e y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? 1 S t r o n g N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e EMPLOYER 3 a . Y o u r e m p l o y e r ' s a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g y o u r p o s s i b l e p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i s : V e r y D i s c o u r a g i n g D i s c o u r a g i n g I n d i f f e r e n t E n c o u r a g i n g 5 V e r y E n c o u r a g i n g 3 b . T o w h a t e x t e n t d i d y o u r e m p l o y e r s ' a t t i t u d e r e g a r d i n g y o u r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i n f l u e n c e y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? 1 S t r o n g N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s 1 1 i v e I n f 1 u e n c e E D U C A T I O N A L U T I L I T Y 4 a . G e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , i n d i c a t e w h a t y o u r b e l i e f i s 1 r e g a r d i n g e d u c a t i o n a s a m e a n s o f g a i n i n g g r e a t e r S t r o n g l y m a s t e r y o v e r o n e ' s l i f e . D i s b e l i e v e 4 b . What d e g r e e o f i n f l u e n c e d i d y o u r b e l i e f h a v e o n y o u r 1 e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? S t r o n g N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e P E R S O N A L A B I L I T Y 5 a . T o w h a t e x t e n t d o y o u t h i n k y o u a r e c a p a b l e o f 1 m a s t e r i n g t h e s k i l l s t o b e p r e s e n t e d a t C h a u t a u q u a I n c a p a b l e 198 1 ? 5 b . W h a t d e g r e e o f i n f l u e n c e d i d y o u r b e l i e f r e g a r d i n g 1 y o u r c a p a b i l i t y h a v e o n y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? S t r o n g -N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e T I M E 6 a . I s C h a u t a u q u a 1981 s c h e d u l e d a t a t i m e s u i t a b l e f o r 1 y o u t o a t t e n d ? U n s u i t a b l e 6 b . T o w h a t e x t e n t d i d t h e s c h e d u l i n g o f t h e 1981 1 C h a u t a u q u a I n f l u e n c e y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n ? S t r o n g N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E D i s be1 i e v e U n d e c i d e d B e 1 1 e v e S t r o n g l y B e l i e v e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e . S I i g h t l y C a p a b 1 e M o d e r a t e 1y C a p a b 1 e 4 V e r y C a p a b l e E x t r e m e 1y C a p a b l e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e S I i g h t l y Su i t a b l e M o d e r a t e 1y Su i t a b l e 4 V e r y Su i t a b l e E x t r e m e 1y Su i t a b l e N e g a t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e 3 No I n f 1 u e n c e P o s i 1 1 v e I n f 1 u e n c e 5 S t r o n g P o s i t i v e I n f 1 u e n c e S E C T I O N I I I DEGREE OF C E R T A I N T Y OF A C H I E V I N G O B J E C T I V E S AS A R E S U L T OF P A R T I C I P A T I N G IN THE 1981 CHAUTAUQUA T h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s s e c t i o n i s t o o b t a i n y o u r o p i n i o n o n y o u r d e g r e e o f c e r t a i n t y t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n , i n t h e 1981 C h a u t a u q u a w i l l l e a d t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f s p e c i f i e d o b j e c t i v e s . On t h e n e x t p a g e a r e s t a t e m e n t s o f o b j e c t i v e s w h i c h s o m e p e o p l e e x p e c t t o a c h i e v e i n t h e c o u r s e o f a n e d u c a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . T h e r e a r e no r i g h t o r w r o n g a n s w e r s . R e a d e a c h o b j e c t i v e a n d c i r c l e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h r e s p o n s e w h i c h b e s t r e p r e s e n t s w h e t h e r o r n o t y o u e x p e c t t o a c h i e v e t h e s t a t e d o b j e c t i v e w h i l e p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 . L e t 1= Y o u a r e c e r t a i n t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l NOT 1 e a d t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e . 5= Y o u a r e c e r t a i n t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 WILL 1 e a d t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e . E x a m p l e : C I R C L E ONE R E S P O N S E ON E A C H S C A L E Ob j e c t i v e : P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o b e c o m e a b e t t e r i n f o r m e d 1 2 3 4 5 p e r s o n . C e r t a i n n o t U n l i k e l y U n c e r t a i n L i k e l y C e r t a i n t o O c c u r t o O c c u r R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u r e x p e c t a t i o n o f a c h i e v i n g t h e a b o v e o b j e c t i v e a s a r e s u l t o f 1 2 3 4 5 p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 i s c e r t a i n t o o c c u r , c i r c l e 5. I f y o u a r e u n c e r t a i n t h a t y o u w i l l a c h i e v e t h e o b j e c t i v e , c i r c l e 3 . 1 2 3 4 5 I f y o u a r e c e r t a i n y o u w i l l NOT a c h i e v e t h e o b j e c t i v e , c i r c l e 1. 1 2 3 4 5 O B J E C T I V E S : C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E £ 1 4 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o : a . l e a r n f o r t h e s a k e o f l e a r n i n g . b . s a t i s f y my c u r i o s i t y a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . c . p r o v e t o m y s e l f t h a t I am c a p a b l e o f l e a r n i n g t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . d . b e c o m e a b e t t e r i n f o r m e d p e r s o n a b o u t a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . e . p a r t i c i p a t e i n a n e n j o y a b l e , i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . f . f u l f i l a n e e d t o b e w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e . g . v i s i t V a n c o u v e r . h . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f h o m e . i . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f w o r k . j . e n g a g e i n a n a c t i v i t y w h i c h I p a r t i c u l a r l y e n j o y . C e r t a t o O c c u r n n o t U n l i k e l y U n c e r t a i n L i k e l y C e r t a i n t o O c c u r S E C T I O N IV D E S I R A B I L I T Y OF A C H I E V I N G O B J E C T I V E S D e s i r a b i1 i t y o f a n o b j e c t i v e j_s n o t t h e same t h i n g a s i m p o r t a n c e . D e s i r a b i l i t y r e f e r s t o t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h y o u w a n t t o a c h i e v e a n o b j e c t i v e b e c a u s e o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n y o u b e l i e v e i t w i l l g i v e y o u . I t i s a n a f f e c t i v e o r e m o t i o n a l a t t r a c t i o n t o s o m e t h i n g , n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r a t i o n a l o r n e e d i n g j u s t i f i c a t i o n . I m p o r t a n c e o n t h e o t h e r h a n d r e f e r s t o how h i g h i n p r i o r i t y a n o b j e c t i v e i s r e l a t i v e t o o t h e r s t h a t y o u w a n t t o a c h i e v e a t t h e moment i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n . I n t h i s s e c t i o n we a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h d e s i r a b i 1 i t y . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e r e - s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s y o u h a v e j u s t c o n s i d e r e d , p l e a s e c i r c 1 e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h o b j e c t i v e t h a t b e s t r e p r e s e n t s how d e s i r a b 1 e o r u n d e s i r a b 1 e t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f e a c h o b j e c t i v e i s t o y o u a t t h i s m o m e n t . L e t 1 = 5 = v e r y u n d e s i r a b l e v e r y d e s i r a b l e E X A M P L E C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E Ob j e c t i v e : P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o b e c o m e a b e t t e r 1 2 3 4 5 i n f o r m e d p e r s o n . V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e I n d i f f e r e n t D e s i r a b l e V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e D e s i r a b l e R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u r a n t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e i s v e r y 1 2 3 4 5 d e s i r a b l e , c i r c l e 5 . I f y o u a r e i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h e a n t i c i p a t e d a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h e 1 2 3 4 5 o b j e c t i v e , c i r c l e 3 . I f y o u r a n t i c i p a t e d a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e i s u n d e s i r a b l e , c i r c l e 1 . O B J E C T I V E S C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON E A C H S C A L E 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o : 1 2 3 4 5 V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e I n d i f f e r e n t D e s i r a b l e V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e D e s i r a b l e a . l e a r n f o r t h e s a k e o f l e a r n i n g . b . s a t i s f y my c u r i o u s i t y a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . c . p r o v e t o m y s e l f t h a t I am c a p a b l e o f l e a r n i n g t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . d . b e c o m e a b e t t e r i n f o r m e d p e r s o n a b o u t a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . e . p a r t i c i p a t e i n a n e n j o y a b l e i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . f . f u l f i l a n e e d t o b e w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e . g . v i s i t V a n c o u v e r . h . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f h o m e . i . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f w o r k . j . e n g a g e i n a n a c t i v i t y w h i c h I p a r t i c u l a r l y e n j o y . zn S E C T I O N V IMPORTANCE OF O B J E C T I V E S IN ENROLLMENT D E C I S I O N R e m e m b e r , we made a d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n i m p o r t a n c e a n d d e s i r a b i 1 i t y . I n t h i s s e c t i o n we a r e c o n c e r n e d wi t h s a i d t h a t i m p o r t a n c e r e f e r s t o how h i g h i n p r i o r i t y a n o b j e c t i v e i s r e l a t i v e t o o t h e r s t h a t y o u w a n t t o a c h i e v e i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n . i m p o r t a n c e . We a t t h e moment T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e f u r t h e r r e s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s y o u h a v e b e e n c o n s i d e r i n g . P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h o b j e c t i v e t h a t b e s t r e p r e s e n t s how i m p o r t a n t y o u r d e s i r e t o a c h i e v e t h a t s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e was i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 . L e t 1= M u c h l o w e r p r i o r i t y i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n . 5= M u c h h i g h e r p r i o r i t y i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n . E x a m p 1 e :  Ob j e c t i v e : C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E P a r t i c i p a t i o n b e t t e r p e r s o n . i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o b e c o m e a M u c h L o w e r P r i o r i t y S o m e w h a t L o w e r P r i o r i t y A v e r a g e P r i o r i t y S o m e w h a t H i g h e r P r i o r i t y 5 M u c h H i g h e r P r i o r i t y R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u r d e s i r e t o a c h i e v e t h i s o b j e c t i v e was h i g h e s t o n y o u r p r i o r i t y l i s t o f o b j e c t i v e s a t t h e t i m e y o u w e r e c o n s i d e r i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t t o e n r o l l In C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 , a n d y o u w e r e c e r t a i n t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a w o u l d e n a b l e y o u t o a c h i e v e t h e o b j e c t i v e , w h i c h t h e r e f o r e i n f l u e n c e d y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n a c c o r d i n g l y , c i r c l e 5. I f i n y o u r c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o e n r o l l t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n o f t h i s o b j e c t i v e o n y o u r p r i o r i t y l i s t o f o b j e c t i v e s was a v e r a g e , c i r c l e 3 . I f h o w e v e r i t was m u c h o b j e c t i v e s , c i r c l e 1. l o w e r o n y o u r p r i o r i t y l i s t o f O B J E C T I V E S C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l e n a b l e me t o : 1 2 3 4 5 M u c h L o w e r Somewha t A v e r a g e S o m e w h a t M u c h H i g h e r P r i o r i t y L o w e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y H i g h e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y a . l e a r n f o r t h e s a k e o f l e a r n i n g . b . s a t i s f y my c u r i o u s i t y a b o u t t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . c . p r o v e t o m y s e l f t h a t I am c a p a b l e o f l e a r n i n g t h e 1 s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s . d . b e c o m e a b e t t e r i n f o r m e d p e r s o n a b o u t a d u l t e d u c a t i o n . e . p a r t i c i p a t e i n a n e n j o y a b l e , i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y . f . f u l f i l a n e e d t o b e w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e . g . v i s i t V a n c o u v e r . h . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f h o m e . b r e a k t h e r o u t i n e o f w o r k . j . e n g a g e i n a n a c t i v i t y w h i c h I p a r t i c u l a r l y e n j o y . S E C T I O N VI I N S T R U M E N T A L I T Y OF P A R T I C I P A T I O N IN A C H I E V I N G OTHER O B J E C T I V E S M a n y p e o p l e b e l i e v e t h a t a s a r e s u 1 1 o f h a v i n g p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a s p e c i f i c a d u l t e d u c a t i o n p r o g r a m t h e y w i l l b e a b l e t o a c h i e v e c e r t a i n o b j e c t i v e s . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s s e c t i o n i s t o o b t a i n y o u r o p i n i o n o n how p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 m i g h t b e r e l a t e d t o t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f s e l e c t e d o b j e c t i v e s . R e a d e a c h o f t h e f o l l o w i n g o b j e c t i v e s c a r e f u l l y a n d c i r c l e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h o b j e c t i v e w h i c h b e s t r e p r e s e n t s t h e s t r e n g t h o f y o u r b e l i e f t h a t y o u r a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e i s e n t i r e l y i n d e p e n d e n t o r d e p e n d e n t u p o n y o u r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 . L e t 1= V e r y s t r o n g b e l i e f t h a t t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e i s e n t i r e l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a . 5= V e r y s t r o n g b e l i e f t h a t t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e i s e n t i r e l y d e p e n d e n t u p o n p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a , . E x a m p 1 e C I R C L E ONE R E S P O N S E ON E A C H S C A L E P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l h e l p - me t o p e r f o r m a n c e i n t h e j o b I now h o l d . i m p r o v e my 1 2 3 4 5 E n t i r e l y L a r g e l y U n c e r t a i n L a r g e l y E n t i r e l y I n d e p e n d e n t I n d e p e n d e n t D e p e n d e n t D e p e n d e n t R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u s t r o n g l y b e l i e v e t h a t y o u r a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h a t o b j e c t i v e i s e n t i r e l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n , c i r c l e 1. I f y o u a r e u n c e r t a i n , c i r c l e 3. I f y o u s t r o n g l y b e l i e v e t h a t i t s a c h i e v e m e n t i s e n t i r e l y d e p e n d e n t u p o n p a r t i c i p a t i o n , c i r c l e 5. O B J E C T I V E S : C I R C L E ONE R E S P O N S E ON EACH S C A L E 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l 1 2 3 4 5 E n t i r e l y L a r g e l y U n c e r t a i n L a r g e l y E n t i r e l y I n d e p e n d e n t I n d e p e n d e n t D e p e n d e n t D e p e n d e n t a . e n a b l e me t o a d v a n c e i n my p r e s e n t o c c u p a t i o n a l c a r e e r . b . ' h e l p me i n o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l c o u r s e s w h i c h I i n t e n d t o t a k e . c . p r e p a r e me t o b e a b l e t o s e r v e o t h e r s i n a p a r t i c u l a r w a y . d . e n a b l e me t o c a r r y o u t a s t e p i n a p l a n I h a v e made f o r m y s e l f a i m e d a t a c h i e v i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . e . e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e my g e n e r a l a b i l i t y t o s e r v e m a n k i n d . f . e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e t h e s o c i a l p o s i t i o n t h a t I h a v e . g . e n a b l e me t o i n c r e a s e my c o m p e t e n c e t o a c h i e v e my g o a l s . h . e n a b l e me t o l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s s o t h a t I w i l l b e a b l e e v e n t u a l l y t o s h a r e a common i n t e r e s t w i t h o t h e r p e r s o n s . g i v e me a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o make c o n t a c t s f o r p o s s i b l e j o b o p e n i n g s . j . g i v e me a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e f l e c t o n my p r a c t i c e . S E C T I O N V I I D E S I R A B I L I T Y OF A C H I E V I N G O B J E C T I V E R e m e m b e r we s a i d , t h a t d e s i r a b i 1 i t y r e f e r s t o t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h y o u w a n t t o a c h i e v e a n o b j e c t i v e b e c a u s e o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n y o u b e l i e v e i t w i l l g i v e y o u . I t i s a n a f f e c t i v e o r e m o t i o n a l a t t r a c t i o n t o s o m e t h i n g , n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r a t i o n a l o r n e e d i n g j u s t i f i c a t i o n . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e r e s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s y o u h a v e j u s t c o n s i d e r e d i n S E C T I O N V I . P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h o b j e c t i v e t h a t b e s t r e p r e s e n t s how d e s i r a b l e o r u n d e s i r a b l e t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f e a c h o b j e c t i v e i s t o y o u a t t h i s m o m e n t . L e t 1 = 5 = V e r y u n d e s i r a b l e V e r y d e s i r a b l e E x a m p l e : Ob j e c t i v e : C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON E A C H S C A L E P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l h e l p me t o i m p r o v e my 1 2 3 4 5 p e r f o r m a n c e i n t h e j o b I now h o l d . V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e I n d i f f e r e n t D e s i r a b l e V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e D e s i r a b l e R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u r a n t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e i s v e r y 1 2 3 4 5 d e s i r a b l e , c i r c l e 5. I f y o u a r e i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h e a n t i c i p a t e d a c h i e v e m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e , c i r c l e 3 . I f y o u r a n t i c i p a t e d a c h i e v e m n t o f t h e o b j e c t i v e i s v e r y u n d e s i r a b l e , c i r c l e 1. O B J E C T I V E S C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON E A C H S C A L E 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l 1 2 3 4 5 V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e I n d i f f e r e n t D e s i r a b l e V e r y U n d e s i r a b l e D e s i r a b l e a . e n a b l e me t o a d v a n c e i n my p r e s e n t o c c u p a t i o n a l c a r e e r . b . h e l p me i n o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l c o u r s e s w h i c h I i n t e n d t o t a k e . c . p r e p a r e me t o b e a b l e t o s e r v e o t h e r s i n a p a r t i c u l a r w a y . d . e n a b l e me t o c a r r y o u t a s t e p i n a p l a n I h a v e made f o r m y s e l f a i m e d a t a c h i e v i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . e . e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e my g e n e r a l a b i l i t y t o s e r v e m a n k i n d . f . e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e t h e s o c i a l p o s i t i o n t h a t I h a v e . g . e n a b l e me t o i n c r e a s e my c o m p e t e n c e t o a c h i e v e my g o a l s . h . e n a b l e me t o l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e p r o g r a m s s o t h a t I w i l l b e a b l e e v e n t u a l l y t o s h a r e a common i n t e r e s t w i t h o t h e r p e r s o n s . g i v e me a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o make c o n t a c t s f o r p o s s i b l e j o b o p e n i n g s . j . g i v e me o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o r e f l e c t o n my p r a c t i c e . 2*3 S E C T I O N V I I I IMPORTANCE OF O B J E C T I V E S IN ENROLLMENT D E C I S I O N R e m e m b e r we s a i d t h a t i m p o r t a n c e r e f e r s t o how h i g h i n p r i o r i t y a n o b j e c t i v e i s r e l a t i v e t o o t h e r s t h a t y o u w a n t t o a c h i e v e a t t h e moment i r r e s p e c t i v e o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d s a t i s f a c t i o n . T h e f o l l o w i n g a r e f u r t h e r r e s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e o b j e c t i v e s y o u h a v e b e e n c o n s i d e r i n g f r o m S E C T I O N V I . P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e n u m b e r o n t h e s c a l e b e s i d e e a c h o b j e c t i v e t h a t b e s t r e p r e s e n t s how i m p o r t a n t y o u r d e s i r e t o a c h i e v e t h a t s p e c i f i c o b j e c t i v e was i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 . L e t 1= M u c h l o w e r p r i o i t y i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n . 5= M u c h h i g h e r p r i o r i t y i n i n f l u e n c i n g y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n . E x a m p l e : O b j e c t i v e : C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l h e l p me t o i m p r o v e my 1 2 3 4 5 p e r f o r m a n c e i n t h e j o b I now h o l d . M u c h L o w e r Somewha t A v e r a g e S o m e w h a t M u c h H i g h e r P r i o r i t y L o w e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y H i g h e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y R e s p o n s e S e a 1e : I f y o u r d e s i r e t o a c h i e v e t h i s o b j e c t i v e was h i g h e s t o n y o u r 1 2 3 4 5 p r i o r i t y l i s t o f o b j e c t i v e s a t t h e t i m e y o u w e r e c o n s i d e r i n g w h e t h e r o r n o t t o e n r o l l i n C h a u t a u q u a 1 9 8 1 , a n d y o u w e r e c e r t a i n t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a w i l l e n a b l e y o u t o a c h i e v e t h e o b j e c t i v e , w h i c h t h e r e f o r e i n f l u e n c e d y o u r e n r o l l m e n t d e c i s i o n a c c o r d i n g l y , c i r c l e 5. I f i n y o u r c o n s i d e r a t i o n t o e n r o l l t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n o f 1 2 3 4 5 t h i s o b j e c t i v e o n y o u r p r i o r i t y l i s t o f o b j e c t i v e s was a v e r a g e , c i r c l e 3. I f h o w e v e r i t was m u c h l o w e r o n y o u r p r i o r i t y l i s t o f o b j e c t i v e s , c i r c l e 1. O B J E C T I V E S C I R C L E ONE RESPONSE ON EACH S C A L E 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C h a u t a u q u a 1981 w i l l 1 2 3 4 5 M u c h L o w e r Somewha t A v e r a g e S o m e w h a t M u c h H i g h e r P r i o r i t y L o w e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y H i g h e r P r i o r i t y P r i o r i t y a . e n a b l e me t o a d v a n c e i n my p r e s e n t j o b o r o c c u p a t i o n a l c a r e e r . b . h e l p me i n o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l c o u r s e s w h i c h I i n t e n d t o 1 t a k e . c . p r e p a r e me t o b e a b l e t o s e r v e o t h e r s i n a p a r t i c u l a r 1 w a y . d . e n a b l e me t o c a r r y o u t a s t e p i n a p l a n I h a v e made f o r 1 m y s e l f a i m e d a t a c h i e v i n g a p a r t i c u l a r g o a l . e . e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e my g e n e r a l a b i l i t y t o s e r v e 1 mank i n d . f : e n a b l e me t o i m p r o v e t h e s o c i a l p o s i t i o n t h a t I h a v e . g . e n a b l e me t o i n c r e a s e my c o m p e t e n c e t o a c h i e v e my g o a 1 s . h . e n a b l e me t o l e a r n t h e s u b j e c t s o r s k i l l s t a u g h t i n t h e 1 p r o g r a m s s o t h a t I w i l l b e a b l e e v e n t u a l l y t o s h a r e a common i n t e r e s t w i t h o t h e r p e r s o n s . i . g i v e me a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o make c o n t a c t s f o r p o s s i b l e j o b o p e n i n g s . j . g i v e me o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o r e f l e c t o n my p r a c t i c e . THANK YOU Chautauqua by tlje Pacific Y o u w i l l be a b l e to c h o o s e f r o m 14 w o r k s h o p s of 1, 2, 3 or 5 d a y s d u r a t i o n c o v e r i n g a range of t o p i c s a n d i n t e r e s t s in adu l t e d u c a t i o n . In formal l e a rn i ng a n d n e t w o r k b u i l d i n g w i l l be a i d e d by p l a n n e d o p p o r t u n i t y to m e e t a n d sha re e x p e r i e n c e s w i t h c o l l e a g u e s f r om o ther l o c a t i o n s . A c c o m m o d a t i o n s are a v a i l a b l e on c a m p u s or in d o w n t o w n ho te l s . W e e k e n d s a n d e v e n i n g s are o p e n for e x p l o r a t i o n of the c a m p u s e n v i r o n m e n t ( beache s , m u s e u m s , gardens) . V a n c o u v e r a n d s u r r o u n d i n g areas . P r o g r a m c h o i c e s w i l l i n c l u d e M a n a g i n g the B u s i n e s s of C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n . O r g a n i z a t i o n a l C o n s u l t i n g S k i l l s ; P o l i s h i n g Y o u r T r a i n i n g S k i l l s ; D e s i g n i n g a n d M a n a g i n g I n s t r uc t i on for A d u l t s ; P o l i c y D e v e l o p m e n t ; D e v e l o p m e n t a n d De l i ve r y of C o n t i n u i n g P r o f e s s i o n a l E d u c a t i o n : C o u n s e l l i n g A d u l t s ; L e a r n i n g , C o m m u n i t y A c t i o n a n d C h a n g e A g e n t s : The L i n k a g e s a n d o the r s . The s c h e d u l e w i l l a l l o w e a c h pa r t i c i p an t to a t t e n d at l e a s t t w o a n d up to t h ree event s : June 22-26, 1981 Profess iona l Development for Adult and Cont inu ing Educators. Fo r a d e t a i l e d p r o g r a m b rochu re , wr i te E l a y n e Har r i s , A d u l t E d u c a t i o n P r o g r a m s , C e n t r e for C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n , T h e Un i ve r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , V a n c o u v e r , B.C., V6T 2A4. S p o n s o r e d by t he C e n t r e for C o n t i n u i n g E d u c a t i o n a n d t h e D e p a r t m e n t of A d u l t E d u c a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . J o i n a week - l ong l ea rn i ng c o m m u n i t y of adu l t a n d c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t o r s f r om a c r o s s C a n a d a a n d the U.S. at The Un i ve r s i t y of B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . S t a y in c a m p u s f a c i l i t i e s o v e r l o o k i n g the P a c i f i c , a t t end w o r k s h o p s re levant to your p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d m a k e c o n t a c t w i t h c o l l e a g u e s f r om a var iety of adu l t a n d c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n se t t i ng s . Chautauqua by the Pacific Chautauqua Opening • For All Participants Orientat ion, Welcome and Introductions Monday, June 22; 9:00 a.m. • 10:30 a.m. This is an opportunity lor the entire Chautauqua community • participants, resource people and Chautauqua staff • to meet. It will be a time for us to welcome you, to Introduce the Chautauqua faculty and staff, and to give you details of the week's informal activities for learning and relaxing. We are pleased to have this morning's orientation capped by Or. W. Griffith, Chairman of the Adult Education Division, UBC, wno will sketch the Chautauqua phenomenon in an ad-dress entitled "Chautauqua: Symbol ot Continuing Educa-tion." After the formalities, we will adjourn for coffee and muffins and at 11:00 a.m., begin the week's workshops. Managing the Business of Continuing Education AE-2037-281 Limited to 30 participants. Increasing demands for educational services and declining resources are factors which.require creative and effective leadership. In this workshop, senior administrators and pro-gram development staff will focus on the practice of conti-nuing education management, particularly best practice and an analysis of their own potential. The topics Include philosophical foundations of leadership and management, the role of management In finance and budgeting, develop-ing and managing staff resources, and marketing adult education programs. The workshop will conclude with a clinic on management problems and opportunities. Resource Person: Morton Gordon Monday. June 22; 11:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 24; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $300 198] Workshops The Systematic Design and Management of Instruction AE 2036-281 Limited to 40 participants. This workshop will help increase your teaching alloc-tlveness. It Is an opporlunily lo design lho instruction lor a short course and to manage a portion ol tho course through a micro-teaching experlonce. You will learn to idontify learn-ing outcomes, and soloct Inslructionai tochnlquos based on the learners. Integration ol outcomo-orlontod and process-oriented approaches to Inslruction will bo stressed. Par-ticipants are asked to bring to tho workshop tho materials (or a short course with which thuy aro currontly (nvoivod. Resource Persons: David Llttlo and Juan McAiiiMur Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4.30 p.m. Tuesday • Friday, June 23-26; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. S500 Polishing Your Training Skills: For Experienced Trainers AE-2038-281 Limited to 30 participants. This workshop will develop the subtle skills which make the difference between good training and superb training. The skills will be familiar but their use will be re-examined, modified, relined and polished. Among the items to be In-cluded are grouping practices, beginnings and endings, methods ol Involving participants In fun experiential work, timing In design, tailoring designs to particular groups, useful feedback tools during training and after, arid follow-up action designs. Participants will design a special evenl during the workshop and critique each others design. Emphasis will be determin-ed by participants and the resource person at the beginning of the workshop. Resource person: Eva Schindlor-Ralnman Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 24; 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. $300 Cont inuing Education In the Professions: A Workshop for Practitioners AE-2039-281 Limited to 30 participants. Tnls workshop will be of particular benefit to persons who develop and deliver educational programs and services lor professional groups (lawyers, engineers, nurses, social workers, librarians, pharmacists, planners, architects, doc-tors, etc.). It will examine several (actors which make development ol appropriate educational responses to the learning needs ol professionals a more complex process than just conducting courses. It will oiler participants a framework tor conceptualizing the role ol continuing educa-tion in the professions and Identity the tools and skills that are required tor ellectlve Implementation. Some of these In-clude learning skills, needs assessment, group process skills, instructional design, motivation, consultation skills, punning and goal setting, etc. Resource Persons: Vince Battlstelll and Andy Farquharson Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 24; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $300 Adult Education and Public Policy AE-2041-281 Limited to 30 participants. The contemporary State must mobilize the willingness to learn among huge and Increasing numbers of Its citizens In order to survive. For this reason, learning, and Its most com-mon Institutional form, adult education, Is emerging as a principal concern of public policy. This workshop will ex-amine a "construct" for Identifying various areas of deci-s ion and the leg i s la t ion and a s s o c i a t e d pol icy characteristic ot each area. Attention will be given to poten-tial conflict between the characteristics of learning and the formulation of public policy. Groups of legislation distinguished by types of goals and the related conse-quences will be examined. A Canadian and American case study will be used to examine the practical effects of public policy. Resource Person: Alan Thomas Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9.00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $200 Organizational Consulting Skills AE-2040-281 Limited to 20 participants. This workshop will locus on the exploration and practice of skills needed by organizational consultants In the areas ot entry, contract development, data co l lod ion planning, diagnosis, and the design of Interventions. The approach Is an Intensive, guided case-study simulation, in which par-ticipants work as consulting teams to a largo educational bureaucracy. Outcomes for participants will dupund un Ihoir specific learning goals. For particular skill aruas (eg., untry, diagnosis, etc.), one can expect to (a) become mote aware of one's present skill level; (b) sharpen existing competence; (c) become aware of wider repertoire of bonaviour:., (d) link Isolutod skills togethor Into more elfuctlve puilonnancu Rosourco Person: Matthew Mllus Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 24; 9:00 am. • 4:30 p.m. $300 Community Development • Concepts and Theories AE-2042-281 Limited to 25 participants. This seminar Is designed for community developers wishing to survey theories which can Improve practice, as good theory Is a prerequisite to effective practice. A range ol con-cepts and theories which can be used to understand the community development process will be addrossod. Theories of learning, communication, Intorgioup and in-terpersonal behavior, organization, economic development and political change will be Introduced, as they relate to community development. Emphasis throughout is on tno dynamic relationship between learning and action, Its pre-sent relevance and luture potential. The knowledge, skills and attitudes needed by a community development worker to cope with action plans and opportunities will bo discuss ed. Resource Person: Hayden Roberts Monday, June 22; 11:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 24; 9:00 a.m. • 12 noon $250 Inst i tut ion Based Learning - Only the Tip of the Adul t Learning Iceberg? AE-2043-281 / AE-2049-281 Limited to 30 participants. Only twenty percent of an adult's learnlng'ls planned by pro-fessionals, such as those In Institutions of higher learning and continuing education. By far, the great bulk of adult learning consists of self-planned learning. What are the ser-vices and programming that would encourage adults to look to your Institution lor a greater proportion of their learning efforts? This workshop takes a fresh look at the spectrum of adult learning both In terms of human development and pro-gram packaging. It examines the scope of adult learning ac-tivities outside the classroom and Identifies new types ol assistance which adult learners are seeking. Resource Person: Elaine McCreary Wednesday. June 24; 9.00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. AE-2043-281 Repeated on: Friday. June 26; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. AE-2049-281 $100 Developing Performance Planning, Coaching and Review Skills In Managers AE-2045-281 Limited to 30 participants. Organizations In both Canada and the U.S. are facing mounting demands for more performance and more accoun-tability both In the public and private sectors. A comprehen-sive system of perlormance management Involves perfor-mance planning, coaching and review. In this workshop you will learn ways to train managers In developing effective performance plans, In coaching of staff members and In measuring and appraising performance. You will also learn training techniques to help managers select performance management approaches geared to their specific work situations, and a situational approach already In use by many major organizations to Increase ellectlvoness and ac-countability. Resource Person: Marshall Goldsmith Thursday, June 25; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Friday, June 26; 9:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. $200 Z2& Linking Social Act ion, Change Agents and Learning AE-2044-281 Limited to 30 participants Community developers, change agents and other persons who want to make change happon, need and use an amaz-ingly diverse 6et of skills and compoioncios. This workshop will look at the specific change plans in which participants are Involved In their communities/the dositjn ol ways to help change happen, and the evaluation ol progru^s< towards those changes. It will consider thu usu ol learning principles In helping community members dovelop realistic goals and action plans, and ways to help groups lomiulaiu plans without encouraging dependence. Aitontiun will bo p a i d io working wllh dilferont age groups Including inlurgunoru-tlonal groups, Increasing collaboration among community organizations and Issues contributed by tne part icipant:* Resource Purson: Eva Schlndlor Ralnrnun • Thursday, June 25; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Friday, Juno 26: 9:00 a.m. • 4.30 p.m. $200 Holist ic Approaches to Adult Education AE-2046-281 Limited to 30 participants. How can we achieve peak performance, optional well being, maximum learning? What are the applications ol right braln/lelt brain research, the consciousness disciplines, biofeedback, holistic health, transpersonal psychology and superlearnlng In helping adults learn? These will be ex-plored In this workshop as tools for enhancing adult learn-ing. Theory Inputs, learning by experiencing, and discus-sions on practical applications In adult education settings will be used to develop an aitornale paradigm for adult lear-ning. Resource Person: Bob Wlele Thursday, June 25; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Friday, June 26; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $200 Counsell ing Adult Learners AE-2047-281 Limited to 30 participants. Program administrators, Instructors and trainers all Interact with adult learners seeking assistance In making choices and taking action to overcome problems which allect their learning. This workshop Introduces participants to elements ot counselling adults. Some ol the topics to be covered are: the helping Interview, how to listen and res-pond ellectlvely, the basis ol adult educational counselling, developing a "counsel l ing" attitude In stall members, learn-ing and development concepts and educational conse-quences ol life crises. The workshop will use experiential learning principles and locus on practical training. Resource Person: Vance Peavy Thursday, June 25; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. Friday. June 26; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $200 Significant Developments in Adult Learning Theory AE-2048-281 Limited to 30 participants. Over the past decade, there has been a virtual "renaissance" In exploration, discovery and concern lor learning. Contributions to learning theory are coming Irom zoology, chemistry, neurology, engineering, physics as well as psychology. At the same time various theorists are at-tempting to "capture" learning by establishing a predomi-nant means ol classifying its characteristics. This workshop will examine various contributions and assess their significance for adult learning. Participants are invilud lo contribute, In detail if they wish, special knowledge ol developments In various fields of research. II you have special knowledge or experience to conlnuulu, a bnul description Is required with your registration lonn Resource Person: Alan Thomas Thursday, June 25; 9:00 a.m. • 4:30 p.m. $100 APPENDIX C MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE PREDICTOR VARIABLES FOR THE ENROLLEE AND NON-ENROLLEE SAMPLES 231 Table A Means and Standard Deviations of P r e d i c t o r V a r i a b l e s V a r i a b l e ENROLLEES (n=88) NON-ENROLLEES (n=88) Means Standard Deviation* Means Standard Deviat ions E 38. 19 6.81 30.20 8.55 VI 38.40 5.28 31 .05 7.86 Impi 29.20 5.95 20.91 9.08 I 28.51 6.33 22.23 8.44 V2 37.05 4.45 30.02 7.55 Imp2 30.98 6.65 19.88 9.50 E E Imp2xIxV2 15741.51 7517.75 6321.88 7719.13 E Imp2xIxV2 407.05 159.48 182.77 185.99 EXfMCf 1 1 .26 3.97 1 1 .47 2.83 EXfrMCfr 1 1 .90 3.52 1 0.58 3.22 EXeMCe 14.89 5.40 8.59 2.7 6 EEelnf 18.73 4.75 1.5.20 3.94 EEexpInf 1 6.40 4.57 13.39 3.17 STInf 1 3.35 4.95 5.28 4.32 E Imp1xExV1 505.05 160.58 260.22 218.21 p < 0.05 Note: E V1 Imp1 I V2 Imp2 E E Imp2xIxV2 E Imp2xIxV2 = Expectancy; = Expectancy valence; = Expectancy Importance; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y ; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence; = I n s t r u m e n t a l i t y importance; = Score of expectancy x the sum of importance x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence = Score of the sum of i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y importance x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y x i n s t r u m e n t a l i t y valence 232 EXfMCf EXfrMCfr EXeMCe EEelnf EEexpInf STInf E Imp1xExV1 = Perceived mot i v a t ion = Perceived motivation = Perceived mot i v a t ion expectations to comply; expectations of to comply; expectat ions to comply; of family x f r i e n d s x of employer x i n f l u e n c e ; expectations Educational E f f i c a c y Educational e f f i c a c y i n f l u e n c e ; S u i t a b i l i t y of Time x i n f l u e n c e ; and Score of the sum of expectancy importance expectancy x expectancy valence 233 APPENDIX D ADDITIVE VERSUS MULTIPLICATIVE COMBINATION OF THE COMBINED EXPRESSIVE-FORCE AND INSTRUMENTAL-VALENCE MODEL 234 A d d i t i v e Combination of the Components of the  Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-VaIence Model Table B Summary S t a t i s t i c s Based on Time, Employer and Valence : A d d i t i v e Form V a r i a b l e s In Order of Entry F. to Enter Wilks' Lambda C o e f f i c i e n t STInf 132.69 * 0.57 0.65 EXeMCe 103.78 * 0.45 0.54 V2 85.09 * 0.40 0.44 V a r i a b l e s not i n the A n a l y s i s A f t e r step 3 E 3.29 I 0.13 Imp2 3.20 EXfrMCfr 1 .64 EXfMCf 0.22 EEelnf 1.14 EEexpInf 2.41 T * p< .05 235 Table C C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees Based on Time, Employer and Valence: A d d i t i v e Form ACTUAL GROUP NUMBER OF CASES PREDICTED GRC )UP MEMBERSHIP ENROLLEE NON-ENROLLEE En r o l l e e 88 75 (85.2%) 13 (14.8%) Non-enrollee 88 6 (6.8%) 82 (93.2%) Percent of cases c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d : 89.2% 236 M u l t i p l i c a t i v e Combination of the Components of  the Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model Table D Summary S t a t i s t i c s Discriminant Function A n a l y s i s - Combined Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model: M u l t i p l i c a t i v e Form V a r i a b l e s In Order of Entry F. to Enter Wilks' Lambda Coef f i c ient STInf 132.69 * 0.57 0.60 EXeMCe 103.78 * 0.45 0.57 V2 77.65 * 0.42 0.35 V a r i a b l e s not i n the A n a l y s i s A f t e r step 3 EXfrMCfr 1 .48 EXfMCf 0.23 EEelnf 0.85 EEexpInf 3.18 T * p< .05 Table E C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Results of E n r o l l e e s and Non-enrollees Based on Time, Employer and the Score of the Expressive-Force and Instrumental-Valence Model: M u l t i p l i c a t i v e Form ACTUAL GROUP NUMBER OF CASES PREDICTED GRC )UP MEMBERSHIP ENROLLEE NON-ENROLLEE E n r o l l e e 88 75 (85.2%) 13 (14.8%) Non-enrollee 88 7 (8.0%) 81 (92.0%) Percent of cas ;es c o r r e c t l y c l a s s i f i e d : 88.6% 

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}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055870/manifest

Comment

Related Items