Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Effects of pre-testing commercial pesticide applicators prior to engaging in a short adult education… Hlatky, Robert M. 1973

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_1973_A8 H53_8.pdf [ 4.23MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0101495.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0101495-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0101495-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0101495-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0101495-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0101495-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0101495-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0101495-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0101495.ris

Full Text

THE EFFECTS OF PRE-TESTING COMMERCIAL PESTICIDE APPLICATORS PRIOR TO ENGAGING IN A SHORT ADULT EDUCATION ACTIVITY by ROBERT M. HLATKY B.Sc.(Agr.) U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, May 1969 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Faculty of Education We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 1973 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f the requirements f o r an advanced degree a t the U n i v e r s i t y • o f B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t c o p y i n g or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l not be allowed w ithout my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . A d u l t E d u c a t i o n Department of The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8 , Canada Date Sept. 18 , 1 9 7 3 . ABSTRACT The purposes of t h i s study were to determine the r e l a t i o n s h i p s of p a r t i c i p a n t socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to the po s t - t e s t , to i n -vestigate the e f f e c t s of p r e - t e s t i n g i n a short-term adult education programme, and to assess the influence of pre-course u t i l i z a t i o n of the handbooks on pre-test and post- t e s t scores. The study was c a r r i e d out on a group of 324 commercial p e s t i -cide applicators who attended 16 i n d i v i d u a l short courses conducted i n 1972 by the B r i t i s h Columbia Department of A g r i c u l t u r e as a means of upgrading the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' knowledge of the safe and proper uses of p e s t i c i d e s . The design used was a modification of the p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t c o n t r o l group type with 135 i n d i v i d u a l s assigned to the treatment con-d i t i o n and 189 assigned to the c o n t r o l . Three hypotheses were tested i n the study. The hypothesis of primary concern attempted to determine whether p r e - t e s t i n g the p a r t i -cipants s i g n i f i c a n t l y improved t h e i r p o s t - t e s t scores. A second hypo-thesis was tested to determine whether a r e l a t i o n s h i p existed between the socio-economic v a r i a b l e s and the post- t e s t scores. A f i n a l hypothesis was tested to determine whether the i n t e n s i t y of pre-course handbook u t i l i z a t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t l y influenced pre-test and post- t e s t mean scores. No d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t due to s i g n i f i c a n t treatment-controi differences were observed i n the v a r i a b l e s : area of o r i g i n of p a r t i -cipants, proportion of salary earned from p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n , previous i i i i i attendance at BCDA sponsored short courses, previous attendance at re-lated, non-BCDA short courses, and number of pesticide application c e r t i -ficates held. The control group were of significantly higher age, had a longer period of residence in Canada, and had more experience as pesti-cide applicators than the treatment group. The effects of each of these characteristics upon the post-test was negligible because of their low individual correlation with the post-test scores. The three variables; previous attendance at BCDA sponsored short courses, previous attendance at related non-BCDA short courses, and number of pesticide application certificates held, exhibited a significantly high degree of mutual inter-correlation. This indicated the variables were measuring a common factor such as a need to participate. Both educational level and pre-test scores significantly i n -fluenced the post-test mean score although the influence of the latter was definitely more pronounced. The intensity of handbook u t i l i z a t i o n positively influenced only the post-test mean score of those participants who received no pre-test. This indicated the pre-test was a better means of improving the post-test mean score than pre-course distribution of the handbooks. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For their guidance, criticism, and encouragement I am indebted to the members of my thesis committee, Dr. J. E. Thornton, Dr. H. R„ MacCarthy, Dr. G. J. Dickinson, and Dr. Coolie Verner. I would like to thank Mr. Chet Nielson and Mr. B. F. Vance for granting me permission to conduct this study at the series of pesticide applicators' short courses conducted by their department. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT • « e « » B * o o 9 0 t > o i > a o ( > o o o « ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JLXST OF TABLES « o « « o « « o a © < » o ' » « < » « o 9 LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L e g i s l a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . History of the B r i t i s h Columbia Department Agri c u l t u r e ' s Short Courses . . . . . . Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluation i n Adult Education A c t i v i t i e s . Design of Evaluation Studies . . . . . . . E f f e c t s of P r e - t e s t i n g . . . . . . . . . . S lJUlUU3.iry • • o a c e o o a o a o v e o a * Plan of the Study « . » • . « REFERENCES • e > » * o o » * o o ( » o » » o » i > CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . Instruments Used . . Groups Under Study . Design of the Study Data C o l l e c t i o n . . Analysis of Data . . Summary . . . REFERENCES . . . O O O © « © © 9 O O a © © a © o a • © 9 0 0 0 a a • • • O 9 Ct CHAPTER I I I SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES Introduction . . . . . Age . . . . . . . . . . Length of Residence i n Canada Area of O r i g i n of P a r t i c i p a n t s Educational Level . . Proportion of Salary Earned from P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n Years of Experience as a P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t o r . . . . Employment Status . . a o • • o« a o a © • « a » • • © • © • 9 Attendance of Related Short Courses and Number of P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n C e r t i f i c a t e s Held . . . . Summary . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ^ CHAPTER IV PRE-TESTING AND HANDBOOK UTILIZATION Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . a © 9 a * • • Rationale f or Combining Groups of S i m i l a r Experimental Conditions . . . . s s a a o o © * v i i Page Effects of Handbook Utilization 48 Source of and Participant Use of Pre-course Handbooks . . . 49 Pre-test Scores ............ 51 Certification Examination . 52 Post-test . . . . . . 54 Analysis of the Means 55 Regression Analyses . . . . . . 60 Separation of Pre-test and Educational Level Effects . . . . 6S Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Introduction 69 Summary 69 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . ?4 BIBLIOGRAPHY LITERATURE CITED . . . . . . . 7 7 RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . 7 9 APPENDIX 1 - Pre-test Instrument . 8 0 APPENDIX 2 - Variable Means, Sample Sizes, and Results of t-tests by Treatment Condition 84 APPENDIX 3 - Correlation Matrix 85 APPENDIX 4 - Analysis of Variance of Pre-test and Post-test Scores of the 3 Landscape Treatment Courses 86 APPENDIX 5 - Analysis of Variance of Post-test Scores of the 3 Control Courses of the Non-agricultural and Non-fo r e s t r y Vegetation Control Topic . APPENDIX 6 - Analysis of Variance of Pre-test Scores of the 6 Treatment Groups LIST OF TABLES Schedule of Short Courses and Treatments Given to Participants, 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Length of Residence in Canada . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By AjT63. Of OlT l^ XXX o a o o a o a o o o o v a a e o Percentage Distribution of Participants By Portion of Income Obtained From the Application Percentage Distribution of Participants By Years of Experience . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Fu l l or Part-time Employment Status . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Employment Status . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Previous BCDA Course Attendance . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Previous Attendance at Related Non-BCDA Sponsored Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Previous Certificates Held . . . . . Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients of Three Measures of Participation . . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Source of Pre-course Handbooks . . . . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants By Pre-course Handbook Use . . . . . Percentage Distribution of Participants in the Treatment Condition By Pre-test Scores . . . . ix X Table Page 15 Percentage Distribution of Participants By Certification Scores 53 16 Percentage Distribution of Participants By Post-test Score . 56 17 Means, Standard Deviations, Sample Sizes and Correlated t-test Results of Pre-test and Post-test Data for Treatment Group 56 18 Sample Size, Standard Deviations, Means and t-test Results Obtained from Pre-test and Post-test Scores from Treatment and Control Groups of Each Course Topic 5 8 19 Results of Regression Analyses ^ 20 Correlation Coefficients for Variables Found to be Significant Contributors to Post-test Variance ^ 21 Correlation Coefficients of Selected Variables ^5 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page Percentage Distribution of Participants By ^ A^6 o a © © a © f t o a o e « o o © © © © © © © « • © © Percentage Distribution of Participants By Educational Level . . . . . . . x i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Prior to the Second World War pesticides were in rather limited use because of their moderate effectiveness on the target species or their extreme mammalian toxicity. As a result of the search for an insecticide to control the Colorado potato beetle in Europe, a Swiss scientist, Paul Muller, discovered the insecticidal properties of a compound which was to become known as DDT. The fact that i t had high toxicity to most insects but compara-tively low toxicity to mammals resulted in i t s being heralded as a miracle insecticide. Increasing quantities of this, and closely related substances of the same group of chlorinated hydrocarbons were produced and used on agricultural land, forests, waters, and backyard gardens during the two decades following the war. It was then discovered that these chemicals were not only extremely toxic to many f i s h and birds but were disturbingly persistent in the bio-sphere. It is this property as well as misinformed applications that resulted in the dangerous, undesirable buildup of residues in the environ-ment. Since the publication of Rachel Carson's book, Silent Spring, in 1962, the general public is becoming increasingly aware of the s c i e n t i f i c community's scant knowledge of the total effects of pesticides in general and i s demanding a more knowledgeable, temperate use of them. Legislation alone is not an effective means of curbing misuses because uninformed applicators can abuse even the most carefully worked out procedures with safe materials. There is a need to give commercial appli-cators explic i t instructions in the proper use and handling of pesticides, 1 2 particularly as these materials affect the natural environment. Legislation and Regulation Man's a b i l i t y to deal effectively with competing pests has been one of the major reasons for his successful existence on this planet. Various types of pesticides, including fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, m i t i -cides, nematocides, and rodenticides have become useful tools in combatting man's enemies. Pesticides have become necessary in the production of agricultural crops and in the improvement of conditions of l i v i n g . These demands have caused a significant increase in the use of the materials. As a result of increased usage both the general public and the s c i e n t i f i c community have become concerned about the detrimental effects of pesticides on the environ-ment. In an effort to allay their concern, governments are attempting to res t r i c t the use of these potentially dangerous substances to competent applicators. Regulations respecting the sale or provision of services involving the use or application of pesticides in British Columbia were enacted under the Pharmacy Act in 1969.^ Administration of these became the responsibility of the Bri t i s h Columbia Department of Agriculture (BCDA). The regulations provide for the cer t i f i c a t i o n of pesticide appli-cators in seven classifications; Agricultural-crop Pest Abatement; Forest or Forest-product Pest Abatement; Non-agricultural and Non-forestry Vegetation Control; 3 Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement; Mosquito and Biting-fly Abatement; Structural Pest Abatement; and Fish, Bird, and Wildlife Management. Certification in the seventh classification i s provided in conjunction with the Fish and Wildlife Branch of the B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Recreation and Conservation. The last named clas s i f i c a t i o n was not con-sidered in this study because of i t s peculiar and highly selective nature. Certificates in a l l categories are issued upon the successful completion of an examination administered by the BCDA. There is a separate, province-wide, standard examination for each of the six categories that were con-sidered here. The certificates are valid for three years, after which the applicator must rewrite the qualifying examination. Although pesticides have been used in this province for many decades there has formerly been no organized means of transmitting reliable, factual information to commercial users of these products, with the exception of farmers. In 1969, the BCDA introduced a series of short courses designed for commercial pesticide applicators. Since that time this province's applicator education programme has led those of the other provinces. Although the number of participants has increased rapidly since 1969, there has been no independent, objective evaluation carried out on any aspect of these short courses. History of the British Columbia Department of Agriculture's Short Courses The purpose of the provincial government's legislation is three-fold: to protect the public and the environment; to promote the proper and 4 knowledgeable use of pesticides; and to provide a means of developing a corps of competent pesticide applicators. Towards these objectives, the BCDA has conducted an annual series of short instructional courses, since the legis-lation was introduced in 1969. These are held at various locations through-out the province, and deal with topics relevant to the various categories of ce r t i f i c a t i o n . When candidates apply to attend the short courses, the Department distributes to each of them a packet of pesticide usage handbooks to enable the candidates to be informed participants. This packet of hand-books i s considered v i t a l to the successful completion of the examination. The courses are from two to five days in length. Attendance i s not a manda-tory prerequisite for writing the examination, although approximately 80 percent of the candidates did so during the f i r s t three series conducted from 1969 to 1971. Immediately upon conclusion of each short course the pertinent examination was administered to the applicants. The original content of these courses was directed solely towards the material contained in the examination. This narrow intent has evolved into the broader objective of producing an educated, competent corps of appli-cators possessing a larger body of information concerning the safe and knowledgeable use of pesticides. The courses now include pertinent material concerning specific problem areas peculiar to the geographical location of the short course and the candidates. This broader scope of content is emphasized by extended question periods. Purpose of the Study No aspects of the BCDA's programme have been evaluated since i t s inception in 1969. A search of the literature has also revealed that no 5 comparable evaluation studies have been attempted on similar pesticide education programmes elsewhere. The major purposes of this study were: 1. to determine the relationships of socio-economic characteristics of the candidates to post-test scores; 2. to investigate the effects of pre-testing in a short-term adult education programme; and 3. to assess the influence of pre-course u t i l i z a t i o n of the hand-books on pre-test and post-test scores. Hypotheses From these purposes three formally stated hypotheses were derived. These are: 1. that a relationship exists between socio-economic variables and the post-test scores. These variables were: the participant's age, educational level, previous attendance at similar BCDA short courses, previous attendance at similar courses sponsored by organizations other than the B.C. government, pesticide applicator's certificates previously held, intensity of use and study of the handbook before the course, length of experience in the appli-cation of pesticides, proportion of income earned from pesticide application during the previous year, and length of residence in Canada; 2. that pre-testing the participants prior to participating in the short course improved their post-test scores; and 3. that the intensity of pre-course handbook u t i l i z a t i o n influenced participant pre-test and post-test mean scores. LITERATURE REVIEW Evaluation in Adult Education Activities Adult education agencies in general have not applied the concept of s c i e n t i f i c evaluation of their programmes. Although adult educators are becoming increasingly aware of this facet of their profession there are s t i l l a great number who adhere to Essert's opinion that "adult education stands on i t s own merits. In the f i n a l analysis there i s no 2 need for elaborate schemes of evaluation." Wilder seems to affirm this conviction by stating "...the programs of adult education were regarded 3 as a good in themselves, a good not to be doubted," but continues in an optimistic note, indicative of an increasing number of adult educators: Only in recent years have the questions arisen as to whether the goals, implicit and assumed for so long, were in fact as important as imagined, and more important, whether they were being measureably attained. In crass terms, was the huge investment of time and money bringing commensurate returns?^ Although adult educators appear to maintain an apparent aversion to s c i e n t i f i c evaluation through adequately designed research, they should not be c r i t i c i s e d ad_ nauseam. It w i l l suffice to conclude with the words of Brunner that: ...in terms of the number involved, the man hours millions of adults spend in the pursuit of knowledge and in proportion to the costs, there is shockingly l i t t l e research in adult education.^ When such research i s conducted i t is found that: In some academic circles i t i s popular to discount [fundamental] research [although]...a 6 7 program b u i l t on an assumed knowledge of a community and i t s population; and of p o t e n t i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s and t h e i r needs, almost i n v a r i a b l y w i l l be better than a program b u i l t on hunches. Brunner sums up the issue with a challenge: "The moral i s that we need research, and research pays."^ Although many adult educators are attempting s c i e n t i f i c evaluations, l i t t l e i s a c t u a l l y being done beyond a mere scratching of the surface. Many i n s t i t u t i o n s s t i l l consider the attainment of a r b i t r a r y attendance goals to be t h e i r primary evaluative c r i t e r i o n . Wilder mentions a study by Freeman, who mailed questionnaires to 54 Jewish Community Centers which queried the d i r e c t o r s as to the c r i t e r i a which they used to determine the g success of adult programmes. Attendance was the most frequently mentioned. In a study conducted on the seven p u b l i c j u n i o r colleges i n Colorado, Banta found that a l l used the growth i n t o t a l enrollment as t h e i r primary 9 source of data for evaluating adult programmes. Ax l i n g i n v e s t i g a t e d the evaluation of extension programmes by county agents i n Washington S t a t e . ^ Forty percent of the monthly reports submitted by County Extension Agents evaluated t h e i r programmes by q u a n t i t a t i v e measures along, whereas only seven percent made any s o r t of judgements about changes i n the behaviour of p a r t i c i p a n t s . S i m i l a r q u a n t i t a t i v e evaluations are p l e n t i f u l i n the 11 12 13 l i t e r a t u r e as exemplified by Johnston and Porter, Long, Shearon, 14 15 McNair, and Kersey. While there i s some merit i n maintaining attendance records, p a r t i c u l a r l y since these c o n s t i t u t e the f i n a n c i a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n of pro-grammes, there i s l i t t l e evaluative b e n e f i t i n these gross numerical t a l l i e s . C r i t i c s l i k e Wilder question the procedure as an evaluative technique by asking: 8 ...what good are the attendance figures by themselves in terms of other goals of adult education? Simply to know adults attend gives no idea of who they are, why they attend, or what happens as a result of their attending. Atten-dance data are necessary to begin to answer t j * e s e questions, but there must be other data too. He goes on to suggest that: ...evaluation studies should describe participants carefully. This i s necessary for two reasons: (a) the participants might have characteristics which would explain the success or failure of the program and (b) i t would make i t possible to duplicate the study and know whether or not participants in various programs are s i m i l a r . ^ These data can be further used in relating "participation...to occupation, educational level, ethnic background, career aspirations, or any number 18 of variables or combination thereof." However, these data are valuable for s t r i c t l y descriptive purposes. They only provide the evaluator with background information concerning the participants. The real need in adult education i s fundamental research u t i l i z i n g adequate experimental designs and s t a t i s t i c a l analysis. Whether the evaluation i s conducted "in terms of changes brought about in the learner, the efficiency of the instructional plan and processes, 19 or the impact of the program on the community" i t must be "viewed with 20 respect to i t s own objectives," as "evaluation i s defined as the process of determining the extent to which educational objectives have been 21 attained." One of the major d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered in the evaluation of educational programmes i s "the lack of clearly-defined c r i t e r i a for 22 determining the quality of behavioral change effected in people." Thiede points out the undesirability of attempting an evaluation without deter-mining clear objectives: 9 While i t i s possible to build programs on the basis of content, methods and resources available, i t i s not possible to evaluate such a program on any other basis than a client 'happiness index'.23 The needs for evaluation, therefore, seem to be a set of clearly-defined objectives which can be used as a means of measuring the change that occurs during an educational ac t i v i t y . Gone are the days when evalu-ation of adult education programmes consisted of completing a post-session checklist or a satisfaction scale. What the discipline needs now are carefully designed research studies which set out to probe the behavioural changes which are produced as a result of an educational activity. Design of Evaluation Studies The importance of carefully controlled research designs i s empha-sized by Hyman's assertion that "introduction of a control group changes the entire view of the nature of program evaluation and leads to a f u l l y 24 s c i e n t i f i c study." This design need not be of the conventional pre-test/ 25 post-test control group type as described by Campbell and Stanley i f one is attempting to determine the effects of practice and test sensitization: An equivalent control group...does not provide an estimate of the effect of pretesting in sensitizing subjects to the subsequent program, because the control group has been pretested but has not been exposed to any particular form of stimulation...a conventional solution...is to divide the...experimental group into two equivalent subgroups...both (of which) receive the program or treatment. One group, however, does not receive the pretest. Then, by comparison of the f i n a l scores of the two groups, one can estimate the specific influence on the experimental group of testing in producing some distorted magnitude of change, resulting from both sheer practice and from sensitization.26 10 Although i t i s d e s i r a b l e to employ an equivalent c o n t r o l group when designing a study i t may be impossible or extremely d i f f i c u l t to do so. In such a case wisdom and judgment may be required to d i s t i n g u i s h pro-27 gramme e f f e c t from non-programme e f f e c t . E f f e c t s of P r e - t e s t i n g Blaney and McKie inve s t i g a t e d the e f f e c t s of providing p a r t i c i -pants at a conference with behaviourally stated objectives of the a c t i v i t y 28 immediately p r i o r to i t s commencement. The two-day conference was e n t i t l e d "New Management Techniques f o r Educators" and was attended by 150 p u b l i c school administrators. I t was determined that those p a r t i c i -pants who received the objectives d i d s i g n i f i c a n t l y b e t t e r on a c r i t e r i o n p o s t - t e s t than d i d those who did not receive the o b j e c t i v e s . Another group received a pre-test immediately p r i o r to the conference. The i n v e s t i g a t o r s assumed that"since a c r i t e r i o n t e s t based upon behaviourally stated objectives c l o s e l y resembled such o b j e c t i v e s . . . the pre-test administration would be s i m i l a r i n e f f e c t to presenting the statement 29 of o b j e c t i v e s . " Siace the group who received the behaviourally stated objectives demonstrated a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t i n p o s t - t e s t scores they assumed that the group who received only a pre-test would demonstrate a s i m i l a r l y s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t . While there are many studies which report an increase i n know-ledge and r e l a t e d f a c t o r s such as favourable a t t i t u d e s , there are others which report e i t h e r n e g l i g i b l e or negative r e s u l t s . Swartz and Winograd report a study conducted on United States Army servicemen who were indoc t r i n a t e d p r i o r to engaging i n manoeuvers r e l a t e d to the use of 11 nuclear weapons. The participants completed a pre-test prior to the indoctrination and a post-test upon i t s completion. An increase in know-ledge was observed on some items while only a marginal increase was noted on others. They concluded that the "information...which had an intimate relation to the soldier's individual protection appeared to be most readily 31 assimilated" while other material was less readily retained. A similar mixed effect was noted by Canter while evaluating a 32 human relations training programme for industrial supervisors. It was noted that the sensitization effects of pre-testing varied in direction. Pre-testing enhanced change in some variables and reduced i t in others, while providing a slight overall reduction in effects. Wilson and Bonilla analyzed the effects of re-testing in an evalu-33 ation study of the effects of an exchange-of-persons programme. It was found that there was a difference i n response of less than one percentage point between those interviewed twice and those interviewed only once. An elaborate study of the practice and sensitization effects of 34 pre-testing was described by Lana. He investigated the relation of these effects to the time interval between pre-test and treatment, and to the time interval and number of post-tests after treatment, whether post-testing was immediate or delayed, and whether or not there was cumulative post-testing, no significant pre-test effects were demonstrated. Rieken u t i l i z e d a control group design to evaluate a volunteer work camp group in an effort to determine the effects of practice and sensi-35 tization. He found that pre-testing negatively sensitized the experi-mental group, which resulted in a resistance to the stimulation which they subsequently received. Solomon, while investigating the influence of 12 pre-testing in sensitizing experimental subjects to training in spelling, 36 obtained a similar negative result. He further speculated that the pre-testing either disturbed the participants emotionally or caused them to repeat on the post-test errors they had made on the pre-test. Terman and M e r r i l l , in a classic study on a revised version of the Stanford-Binet I.Q. test,found that the administration of parallel forms of the test, after one to a few days, resulted in an increase of only three 37 I.Q. points. Only a small practice effect was evident when re-testing was done with the same form. Hovland e_t a l conducted an evaluation of orientation films used during World War II at two military camps u t i l i z i n g a before-after design 38 at one camp and an after-only design at the other. It was determined that pre-testing spuriously reduced the amount of change observed. They attempted to explain this phenomenon by suggesting that "in the before-after procedure the men are stimulated to be consistent in their answers to the questions the second time, either because the men remember their former answer and seek to be consistent or because, having once been forced to 39 give an answer, their opinion tends to be crystallized and repeated." Perhaps one of the best means of reducing the effects of pre-testing i s "by subtle and disguised tests, or by obscuring the significant items in a larger questionnaire. The subjects would be less aware of the specific test items and their content, would find them less easy to remember,and would not become so attentive to specific aspects of the program which in 40 more obvious testing would have been made salient." The effect of pre-testing on learner behaviour is an area in the discipline of adult education which has never been adequately investigated. 13 I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that most of the items which appear i n t h i s l i t e r a t u r e review were obtained from sources other than those s p e c i f i c a l l y dealing with adult education. Previous findings i n d i c a t e that p r e - t e s t i n g e f f e c t s may e i t h e r p o s i t i v e l y or negatively influence the r e s u l t s of a p o s t - t e s t . There i s a d e f i n i t e need f o r studies w i t h i n the adult education d i s c i p l i n e to determine, c o n c l u s i v e l y , the e f f e c t s of p r e - t e s t i n g on both a t t i t u d e and knowledge s c a l e s . Summary Perhaps the best means of summing up the marginal state of evalu-a t i o n research i n adult education i s to quote from Sutton, a f t e r he completed a review of research on the topics The status of evaluation research may be summarized as follows: 1. The majority of studies are h i g h l y l o c a l i z e d and [ t h e i r ] v a l u e . . . i s l i m i t e d to the program studied. 2. Many studies are severely l i m i t e d by weakness of design and of sampling, inadequacy of the data, and inadequacy of the analysis of the data that were obtained. 3. Some stu d i e s , approximately 20 percent of those reviewed, y i e l d e d f i n d i n g s that are g e n e r a l i z a b l e . 4. Some studies, approximately 20 percent ...may we l l serve as models d i r e c t l y , or with minor remediation, for evaluation research i n adult education. 5. A few s t u d i e s , not more than 15 percent ...made fundamental contributions to the general theory of adult education, or to the evaluation of adult education programs.^ Plan of the Study Chapter II consists of the methodology employed i n the study. I t 14 includes the design of the study, the hypotheses that were tested, the instruments that were developed and u t i l i z e d , a description of the 16 groups and the methods of data collection and analysis. Chapter III reports and analyzes the data following the outline presented for Chapter II with respect to the socio-economic data. Chapter IV similarly treats the pre-testing and handbook u t i l i z a t i o n data. Chapter V summarizes the results, develops the conclusions drawn from these, and makes recom-mendations for improvements in future studies. REFERENCES 1. B.C. Government, "Respecting Services Involving the Use or A p p l i c a t i o n of P e s t i c i d e s . " Pharmacy Act. Order i n Council Regulation No. 115(1969). 2. Paul E s s e r t , Creative Leadership of Adult Education. (New York; P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1951), p.161. 3. David E. Wilder, An Overview of Adult Education Research, ed. E. deS. Brunner (Washington: Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n of the U.S.A., 1959), p.244. 4. I b i d . 5. Edmund deS. Brunner, "Adult Education and I t s Research Needs," Adult Education, X, No. 4, 1960, pp.218-227. 6. I b i d . , p.219. 7. I b i d . , p.226. 8. Wilder, op_. c i t . , p.250. 9. CO. Banta, "Sources of Data f o r Program Evaluation," Adult Education, V, No. 4, 1955, pp.227-230. 10. H.L. A x l i n g , "Evaluation of County Extension Programs By County Agents i n Washington State" (M.Sc. Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin, Summary Produced by A g r i c u l t u r a l Extension Service, Washington State U n i v e r s i t y , Pullman, Washington, 1959). 11. Mescal Johnston and Ward Porter, "An Evaluation of the Marketing Project f o r Consumers i n the Metropolitan Area of L i t t l e Rock" (Arkansas A g r i c . Extension Service Miscellaneous P u b l i c a t i o n , No. 88, 1965). 12. Huey B. Long, "A Summary Report: Adult Education P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Brevard County, F l o r i d a , " Adult Education Journal, XIX, No. 1, 1967, pp.34-42. 13. Ronald W. Shearon, "Evaluating Adult Basic Education Programs," Adult Leadership, 19, No. 1, 1970, pp.15-24. 14. Robert E. McNair, " F u l f i l l i n g Our Mission," Adult Leadership, 19, No.6, 1970, pp.183-185. 15 16 15. Harry A. Kersey, J r . , "An Adult Education Program f o r Seminole Indians i n F l o r i d a , " Adult Leadership, 19, No.9, 1971, pp.281-2, 310. 16. Wilder, l o c . c i t . 17. I b i d . , p.251. 18. I b i d . 19. Coolie Verner and Alan Booth, Adult Education (New York: The Center f o r Applied Research i n Education, Inc., 1964), p.96. 20. Ann L i t c h f i e l d , L.A. Marx, and A. S t e j s k a l , "Evaluation of the 1966 Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n National Conference Program," Adult Leadership, 15, No. 8, 1967, p.287. 21. Wilson Thiede, "Evaluation and Adult Education," Adult Education: Outlines of an Emerging F i e l d of Study, eds. Gale Jensen, A.A. L i v e r i g h t , and Walter Hallenbach (Chicago: Adult Education A s s o c i a t i o n of the U.S.A., 1964), p.304. 22. E.J. Boone and J . Duncan, "Needed Research i n Extension Administrative Organization," Adult Education, XII, No. 2, 1963, p.89. 23. Thiede, op_. c i t . , p.294. 24. H.H. Hyman, CR. Wright, and T.K. Hopkins, A p p l i c a t i o n of Methods of Evaluation (Berkeley and Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1962), p.25. 25. Donald T. Campbell and J u l i a n C. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs f o r Research (Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1970), pp.13-24. 26. Hyman, op_. c i t . , p.31. 27. I b i d . , p.24. 28. J.P. Blaney and D. McKie, "Knowledge of Conference Objectives and E f f e c t Upon Learning," Adult Education Journal, XIX, No. 2, 1969, pp.98-105. 29. I b i d . , p.101. 30. Shephard Schwartz and Berton Winograd, "Preparation of Soldiers f o r Atomic Manoeuvers," Journal of S o c i a l Issues, X, No. 3, 1954, pp.42-52. 31. I b i d . , p.52. 17 32. Ralph R. Carter, J r . , "The Use of Extended Control-Group Designs in Human Relations Studies," Psychol. Bull., 48, No. 4, 1951, pp.240-347. 33. E.C. Wilson and F. Bonilla, "Evaluating Exchange of Persons Programs," Public Opin. Quart., XIX, 1955, pp.20-30, cited by Hyman, op. c i t . , p.33. 34. Robert E. Lana, "Pretest-Treatment Interaction Effects in Attitudinal Studies," Psychol. Bull., 56, No. 4, 1959, pp.293-300. 35. H.W. Riecken, The Volunteer Work Camp: A Psychological Evaluation (Cambridge: Addison-Wesley Press, 1952), pp.101-102, cited by Hyman, op_. c i t . , p. 32. 36. R.L. Solomon, "An Extension of the Control Group Design," Psychol. Bu l l . , 46, No. 2, 1949, pp.143-145. 37. L.T. Terman and M.A. M e r r i l l , Measuring Intelligence (Boston: Houghton-M i f f l i n , 1937), pp.43-44. 38. Carl Hovland, A.A. Lumsdaine, and F.D. Scheffield, Experiments On Mass Communication (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949), pp.311-313. 39. Ibid., p.312. 40. C.Y. Glock, "Participation Bias and Re-Interview Effect in Panel Studies" (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1952), cited by Hyman, op. c i t . , p.37. 41. E.W. Sutton, "Analysis of Research On Selected Aspects of Evaluation in Adult Education" (Tallahassee, Florida State University, 1967), p.303. CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY Introduction This chapter details the procedures used to obtain and analyze the data. The hypotheses are restated at the outset, followed by a description of the data-gathering instruments u t i l i z e d in the study. The groups under study are then described with respect to their size, location, and experi-mental condition. This is followed by a discussion of the design employed and the method of collecting the data. The chapter concludes with a detailed account of the s t a t i s t i c a l procedures performed on the data to test the research hypotheses. Hypotheses This study attempted to test three major hypotheses. The hypothesis of primary concern was that pre-testing the short course participants had a significant effect upon post-test scores. That i s , the post-test mean scores for the treatment groups would be significantly higher than those of the control group, provided that the overall post-test mean scores were significantly higher than the pre-test means. Another hypothesis tested was that a relationship existed between the personal variables and the post-test mean score. The third hypothesis of concern was that use by participants of pre-course handbook material had a significant positive effect upon the pre-test and post-test means. 18 19 Instruments Used Although eight d i f f e r e n t instruments were u t i l i z e d during t h i s study only two were developed s p e c i f i c a l l y f o r i t . The Personal Data Questionnaire (Appendix la) was completed by a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s who wrote the B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Ag r i c u l t u r e ' s c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination during the period January 10 to June 9, 1972. This instrument was developed s p e c i f i -c a l l y f o r the study to provide selected information concerning the p a r t i c i -pants' previous experience and other personal v a r i a b l e s . The second instrument consisted of t h i r t y items which were "item sampled" from the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations and were common to a l l s i x short course topics."** This instrument constituted the pre-test and was adminis-tered to a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the treatment groups (Appendix l b ) . The f i n a l s i x instruments u t i l i z e d were the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations which were administered a f t e r each course by the BCDA. The length of exami-nation f o r each c l a s s i f i c a t i o n v a r i e d from 155 to 232 i n d i v i d u a l item responses. Interspersed wi t h i n these examinations were the 30 responses which were u t i l i z e d f o r the pr e - t e s t s . I t was these 30 responses which were the same for a l l groups that were scored to provide the post-test scores. Since these examinations are i n current use by the B r i t i s h Columbia Depart-ment of A g r i c u l t u r e they are unavailable f o r i n c l u s i o n i n t h i s study. Both the Personal Data Questionnaire and the 30-item pre-test were completed by several graduate students i n the Adult Education Department to test the i n s t r u c t i o n s and items f o r c l a r i t y and to gauge the length of time required f o r completion of the instruments by the p a r t i c i p a n t s . I t was not possible to attempt a true p i l o t study on an equivalent sample as there was 20 no p r e r e g i s t r a t i o n from which to s e l e c t such a group and the e n t i r e group for the s i x months ending June 30, 1972 was u t i l i z e d f o r the temporal sample which comprised the p a r t i c i p a n t s f o r t h i s study. Groups Under Study The BCDA's short course programme for the f i r s t s i x months of 1972 consisted of 16 courses conducted at various locati o n s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Table I enumerates the l o c a t i o n s , dates, topics covered, experimental conditions applied, and number of c e r t i f i c a t i o n applicants f o r each short course. The p a r t i c i p a n t s were t y p i c a l l y commercial a p p l i c a t o r s of p e s t i -cides. The c r i t e r i a f o r i n c l u s i o n of p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h i s study were atten-dance at the 1972 s e r i e s of short courses and completion of the Department of A g r i c u l t u r e c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination during the post-course examination periods. As permitted by the l e g i s l a t i o n , several p a r t i c i p a n t s completed the examination at two d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s . Only the f i r s t set of data obtained from these i n d i v i d u a l s was u t i l i z e d , as the subsequent data would undoubtedly be influenced by uncontrolled maturation and p r e - t e s t i n g e f f e c t s . The category with the greatest number of applicants was Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement. P a r t i c i p a n t s t o t a l l e d 99 i n courses held at Surrey, V i c t o r i a , North Vancouver, and Vancouver. The f i r s t three of these groups were assigned the treatment condition and given both pre-test and post-test (n=47). The remaining 52 applicants were assigned the c o n t r o l condition. This arrangement provided two separate conditions with nearly equal numbers of i n d i v i d u a l s i n each. TABLE 1 SCHEDULE OF SHORT COURSES AND TREATMENTS GIVEN TO PARTICIPANTS, 1972. Topic Location Dates Treatments No. Participants Pre-test Post-test Adjustments Landscape and Surrey Jan. 10-11 + + ) Pooled, to 12 Garden Victoria Jan. 17-18 + + ) form one 21 Pest North Vancouver Jan. 23-24 + + I treatment 14 Abatement Vancouver Jan. 27-28 + 52 Forest, or Forest-product Nanaimo, V.I. Apr. 9-10 + + 41 Pest Abatement Parksville,V.I. Jun. 8- 9 + 34 Non-agricultural and Vancouver Feb. 3- 4 + + 12 Non-forestry Kamloops Feb. 28-29 + ) Pooled, to 9 Vegetation Prince George Mar. 1- 2 + ) form one 17 Control Nelson Apr. 19-20 + ) control 31 Agricultural-crop Pest Abbotsford Feb. 14-18 + + 17 Abatement Kelowna Feb. 21-25 + 23 Structural Pest North Vancouver Mar. 21-22 + + 10 Abatement North Vancouver Mar. 21-22 + 12 Mosquito and Biting-fly Kamloops May 1- 2 + + 8 Abatement Abbotsford May 8- 9 + 11 22 The Forest or Forest-products Abatement course conducted at Nanaimo which a t t r a c t e d 41 candidates received the treatment condition. Its c o n t r o l counterpart at P a r k s v i l l e was attended by 34 candidates. Of the four Non-agricultural and Non-forestry Vegetation Control short courses held at Vancouver, Kamloops, Prince George, and Nelson, which a t t r a c t e d 12, 9, 17 and 31 applicants r e s p e c t i v e l y , the Vancouver group received the treatment condition because of budget r e s t r i c t i o n s which prevented pre-test administration at the other o u t l y i n g l o c a t i o n s . There were 40 candidates f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n at the A g r i c u l t u r a l -crop Pest Abatement courses conducted at Abbotsford and Kelowna. The former was composed of 17 applicants who received the treatment con d i t i o n , while the remainder comprised the c o n t r o l group. A somewhat d i f f e r e n t assignment to treatment or c o n t r o l condition was employed at the S t r u c t u r a l Pest Abatement course held at North Vancouver. Since only one course covering t h i s t o p i c was scheduled, the p a r t i c i p a n t s were divided i n t o treatment or c o n t r o l groups, a l t e r n a t i v e l y , upon r e g i s -t e r i n g at the door. This produced a treatment group of 10 i n d i v i d u a l s and a c o n t r o l group of 12. The eight applicants who r e g i s t e r e d at the Mosquito and B i t i n g - f l y Abatement course at Kamloops were assigned the treatment co n d i t i o n . The c o n t r o l f o r t h i s group was sampled at Abbotsford and was composed of 11 i n d i v i d u a l s . Design of the Study The basic design f o r t h i s study was a modification of Campbell and 23 Stanley's Separate-Sample Pretest-Posttest Design. The treatment groups were given a pre-test p r i o r to the short course and a post-test upon i t s conclusion, whereas the c o n t r o l groups were given only the p o s t - t e s t . Both groups received the Personal Data Questionnaire. The sample consisted of sixteen separate short course groups t o t a l l i n g 324 i n d i v i d u a l s . A l l short courses were two days i n length, with the exception of the two conducted f o r A g r i c u l t u r a l - c r o p Pest Abatement a p p l i c a t o r s which were f i v e days long. The c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination period i n a l l cases occurred on the a f t e r -noon of the f i n a l day. The basic d i f f e r e n c e between the design u t i l i z e d i n t h i s study and Campbell and Stanley's Separate-Sample Pretest-Posttest Design i s the absence here of randomization i n sample s e l e c t i o n . Random sampling of i n d i v i d u a l s could not be achieved nor t r u l y random assignment of groups to treatment conditions. I t was not p o s s i b l e to assign i n d i v i d u a l s to groups as each person attended the course of h i s choice without p r e r e g i s t r a t i o n . For the same reason i t was impossible to assign groups to treatments randomly, and i t was f i n a n c i a l l y impossible to pre-test any group outside of the Lower Fraser V a l l e y and Vancouver Island areas, with the exception of the Mosquito and B i t i n g - f l y Abatement course conducted at Kamloops. The e n t i r e group of applicants for 1972 was of necessity considered to be the sample, drawn from a more or l e s s i n f i n i t e population of such samples. In l i g h t of t h i s assumption i t was p o s s i b l e to use i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c a l techniques i n the analysis of data. In a d d i t i o n to those factors enumerated by Campbell and Stanley there are several which add to the v a l i d i t y of t h i s design as employed i n t h i s study. The periods of a c t u a l experimental condition l a s t e d for l e s s 24 than two days in a l l courses except the two 5-day Agricultural-crop Pest Abatement courses. This short period between pre-test and post-test should have prevented any significant effects of history or maturation from inter-fering with the results obtained. The personal data gathered provided a means of determining any differences which may have existed between the individuals of various groups. This design was considered the best possible for the conditions of this study. Data Collection Participants at the eight short courses assigned to the treatment condition, as well as those of the control groups at the Landscaping and Garden Pest Abatement course held at Vancouver and the Structural Pest Control course at North Vancouver were required to register at the door, supplying their name, address, and employer's name. At that time the eight treatment groups were issued the Personal Data Questionnaire and the thirty item pre-test. The two control groups were issued only the Personal Data  Questionnaire. Adequate time was then allotted for completion of these, about twenty minutes. They were then collected prior to the start of the short courses. Participants of the six remaining control groups received the Personal Data Questionnaire with their application for British Columbia Department of Agriculture c e r t i f i c a t i o n form which was distributed after the short courses concluded and immediately prior to the cert i f i c a t i o n examination. The Personal Data Questionnaires were collected as completed, and the c e r t i f i c a -tion examinations distributed. The large c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations distributed by the BCDA 25 consisted of two pa r t s , a closed-book portion from which the 30-item pre-test was obtained, and with which t h i s study was concerned, and an open-book s e c t i o n . Although there was an o f f i c i a l time l i m i t of two and one-half hours imposed upon the e n t i r e examination, t h i s became f l e x i b l e , and adequate time was allowed f o r completion of the closed-book s e c t i o n . This f l e x i b l e time l i m i t was important i n ensuring that a l l candidates completed the post-test regardless of educational, p h y s i o l o g i c a l , or psychological handicaps. P a r t i c i p a n t s were t o l d not to write t h e i r names on e i t h e r the Personal Data Questionnaire or the p r e - t e s t , and that the data requested would be used only to obtain course means. Each was s y s t e m a t i c a l l y dot coded on the back of the f i r s t page. These instruments, f o r the ten groups which received them at the time of r e g i s t r a t i o n , were maintained i n the order which corresponded to the order of names on the r e g i s t r a t i o n sheets. For the remaining c o n t r o l groups the dots corresponded to dots located on the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n form. This code allowed each instrument to be i d e n t i f i e d so that pre-test and Personal Data Questionnaires could be matched with the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination which contained the 30 e l e -ments of the p o s t - t e s t . I t was thought that t h i s anonymity would produce more accurate personal data and would reduce any anxiety produced by completing an unexpected p r e t e s t , although t h i s was unproven and i s mere conjecture. Analysis of Data A l l data obtained from t h i s study were punched onto computer cards and analysed at the U.B.C. Computer Centre u t i l i z i n g the IBM 360/67 computer. 26 The following two chapters w i l l describe the r e s u l t s of the analyses i n d e t a i l . The analyses were conducted at the 5 percent l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e , unless otherwise i n d i c a t e d . To enable i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s to be c a r r i e d out, the personal v a r i a b l e s data were numerically coded, and analyses were c a r r i e d out on the numerical values. The pre-test and post-test r e s u l t e d i n numerical scores which represented the number of c o r r e c t l y answered responses of a poss i b l e t o t a l of 30 items. The f i r s t procedure c a r r i e d out on the data was the production of b i v a r i a t e tables and the c a l c u l a t i o n of chi-square s t a t i s t i c s f o r selected v a r i a b l e s . These were produced by u t i l i z i n g the 1972 r e v i s i o n of the U.B.C. M u l t i v a r i a t e Contingency Tabulations programme. The U.B.C. Triangular Regression Package produced a c o r r e l a t i o n matrix and ca l c u l a t e d simple and mult i p l e regressions f o r selected v a r i a b l e s . M u l t i p l e regression analyses were c a l c u l a t e d on the treatment, the c o n t r o l , and the t o t a l groups independently. Both the numbers of independent v a r i -ables and the l e v e l s of s i g n i f i c a n c e were v a r i e d i n an attempt to determine which v a r i a b l e s contributed most s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the post-test variance. A separate regression a n a l y s i s was made with emphasis on the amount of hand-book u t i l i z a t i o n by p a r t i c i p a n t s . This programme also c a l c u l a t e d c o r r e l a t e d t - t e s t s between the p a i r s of p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t means obtained from the 30 items from each of the eight treatment groups. This analysis attempted to determine whether each treatment, taken separately and independently of the others, had produced a s i g n i f i c a n t increase i n scores. Also to be tested was the d i f f e r e n c e between the pre-test and the post-test means obtained from pooling the common 30 items across the eight treatment groups. 27 Pairs of treatment and control post-test means for each of the six topics were compared separately by the application of non-correlated t-tests in an effort to ascertain the effects due to treatment for each topic. The treatment and control group means were each combined to produce a pair of grand means which were subjected to a further non-correlated t-test to determine the overall effect of the treatment on post-test scores. To allow a comparison of treatment and control mean scores for each of the continuous, interval variables a f i n a l set of non-correlated t-tests were calculated on these means. The variables considered to be continuous and interval were the following: participant age, educational level, previous attendance at similar BCDA short courses, previous attendance at similar courses sponsored by organizations other than the provincial govern-ment, number of pesticide applicator's certificates previously held, inten-sity of pre-course handbook u t i l i z a t i o n , length of experience in the appli-cation of pesticides, proportion of wages earned from pesticide application during the previous year, and length of residence in Canada, Four one-way analyses of variance were computed on the pre-test and post-test means u t i l i z i n g the U.B.C. BMD:X64 computer programme package. The f i r s t of these to be calculated was carried out on the means obtained from the scores of the 30-item pre-test to determine whether the three Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement treatment groups possessed comparable pre-test knowledge. Non-rejection of this test would allow them to be pooled into one group. A like procedure was followed for both the post-test results of these three groups and the post-test results obtained from the three Non-agricultural, Non-forestry Vegetation Control control groups. The fourth analysis of variance was calculated on the pre-test mean scores 28 of the six topics which were assigned the treatment condition. This calcu-lation allowed inferences to be made as to the disparity of the participants' pre-course knowledge. Summary The data were analyzed in two sections. The f i r s t i s the analysis of the participants' socio-economic data which provided a rationale for pooling groups having similar course topics and experimental conditions. It also permitted correlations to be made between the socio-economic variables and the post-test scores. These data also allowed treatment-control compari-sons to be made for each variable, which permitted the dismissal of r i v a l hypotheses based upon treatment and control differences alone. The second portion of the analysis examined the mean scores obtained from the common 30-item pre-test and post-test. Examination of pre-test and post-test means allowed the testing of the assumption that the post-test mean scores would be significantly higher than the pre-test scores. Once this was established the treatment post-test means were s t a t i s t i c a l l y compared with the control post-test means in an effort to determine whether the former were significantly higher than the lat t e r . Establishing this, the pre-test scores and the socio-economic variables were included in multiple regression analyses to determine whether the pre-test contributed the greatest propor-tion of variance to the post-test scores. To test the f i n a l hypothesis, the effect of the pre-course handbook use upon the pre-test and post-test scores was analyzed. REFERENCES T.R. Husek and K. S i r o t n i k , Item Sampling i n Educational Research, Centre f or the Study of Evaluation of I n s t r u c t i o n a l Programs, Occasional Report No. 2 (Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1967). Donald T. Campbell and J.C. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi- Experimental Designs f o r Research (Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1970), pp.53-54. 29 CHAPTER I I I SOCIO-ECONOMIC VARIABLES Introduction The s e r i e s of short courses sponsored by the BCDA f o r the f i r s t h a l f of 1972 a t t r a c t e d 324 p a r t i c i p a n t s who were w i l l i n g to undertake the p e s t i c i d e c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination. The p a r t i c i p a n t s e n r o l l e d i n 16 i n d i v i d u a l short courses, with at l e a s t one group occurring i n the treatment and c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n of each of the s i x t o p i c s . This chapter s h a l l deal with the socio-economic data which were c o l l e c t e d from the p a r t i c i p a n t s by means of the Personal Data Questionnaire. (Appendix l a ) . The v a r i a b l e s discussed are: age of p a r t i c i p a n t s ; length of residence i n Canada; p a r t i -c i p a n t s ' area of o r i g i n ; educational l e v e l ; p o r t i o n of income obtained from the a p p l i c a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s during the previous year; years of experience; f u l l or part-time employment status; self-employed or employee; previous attendance at BCDA sponsored courses; previous attendance at r e l a t e d non-BCDA sponsored short courses; and number of c e r t i f i c a t e s held. The means, sample s i z e s , and the r e s u l t s of t - t e s t s c a r r i e d out on the socio-economic v a r i a b l e means by experimental c o n d i t i o n f o r the personal v a r i a b l e s are i n Appendix 2. Also contained i n t h i s Appendix are s i m i l a r r e s u l t s obtained f o r the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' use of the handbooks, the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations, and the p r e t e s t and post - t e s t data which w i l l be discussed i n Chapter IV. The c o r r e l a t i o n matrix containing the Pearson 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 obtained from c o r r e l a t i n g the twelve continuous, i n t e r v a l v a r i a b l e s i s i n Appendix 3. These d e s c r i p t i v e data are presented 30 31 to allow comparisons to be made between the experimental conditions and to reduce the p o s s i b i l i t y of accepting c o n f l i c t i n g hypotheses that uncontrolled treatment-control d i f f e r e n c e s accounted f o r s i g n i f i c a n t p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t d i f f e r e n c e s . Age Figure I shows that only 5.9 percent of the treatment and 3.2 percent of the c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s were 19 years of age or l e s s . The greatest number of both the treatment (48.9%) and the c o n t r o l (32.3%) were i n the 20 to 29 year range. The remainder of the treatment group was d i s t r i b u t e d as follows: 20.7 percent were 30 to 39; 10.4 percent were 40 to 49; and 14 percent were 50 years or more; while 21.7 percent of the remaining c o n t r o l group were 30 to 39; 23.8 percent were 40 to 49; and 19 percent were over 50. The o v e r a l l ages ranged from 16 to 73, with a mean of 35.5 years. Treatment and c o n t r o l means were 32.5 and 37.6 years r e s p e c t i v e l y . An independent t - t e s t conducted on the d i f f e r e n c e of the two means produced a value of 3.59 which was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . This led to the r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis that the means were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . The age v a r i a b l e was c o r r e l a t e d with the post - t e s t scores to produce a Pearson Product-Moment C o r r e l a t i o n C o e f f i c i e n t of -0.13. These r e s u l t s indicated that, although there was a s l i g h t tendency f o r the younger p a r t i c i p a n t s to obtain higher scores on the pos t - t e s t , and there was s i g n i -f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the ages of the two experimental conditions, the small r-value obtained ind i c a t e d that the o v e r a l l e f f e c t of age upon the post-test scores was n e g l i g i b l e . FIGURE 1 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY AGE TREATMENT CONTROL Range (Years) 8(5.9%) 6(3.2%) 19 or less 66(48.9%) 61(32.3%) 28(20.7%) 14(10.4%) 19(14.1%) 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 or over 41(21.7%) 45(23.8%) 36(19.0%) MEANS: Treatment =32.5 Control =37.6 TOTALS: Treatment = 135 Control = 189 t =3.59; df = 322; p< .01 33 Length of Residence i n Canada Cl o s e l y r e l a t e d to the age of the p a r t i c i p a n t s was t h e i r length of residence i n Canada (r = 0.71). It was found that 7.4 percent of the t r e a t -ment and 2.7 percent of the c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s had resided i n Canada for a period of f i v e years or l e s s (Table 2 ) . Of the former group, 54.1 percent had l i v e d i n t h i s country f o r an i n t e r v a l of from 6 to 25 years and 38.5 percent f o r a greater period, while 34.2 percent of the c o n t r o l group had resided i n the country f o r the 6 to 25 period and 63.1 percent f o r a longer time. A t - s t a t i s t i c was ca l c u l a t e d on the d i f f e r e n c e between the treatment mean of 26.2 and the c o n t r o l mean of 32.8 years. This produced a value of 4.3 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .01 l e v e l and r e s u l t e d i n the r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis which proposed that the means were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t . This v a r i a b l e , independently, had l i t t l e i n fluence on the pos t - t e s t r e s u l t s because of i t s high i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n with the age v a r i a b l e (r = 0.71) and i t s low c o r r e l a t i o n with the post-test scores (r = -0.086). Area of O r i g i n of P a r t i c i p a n t s The greatest number of p a r t i c i p a n t s were born i n English-speaking countries, with 83.6 percent of the treatment and 87.6 percent of the c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s o r i g i n a t i n g from these areas (Table 3 ) . Of these 277 i n d i v i -duals, 84.5 percent were born i n Canada. Only 16.4 percent of the treatment and 12.7 percent of the c o n t r o l groups were born i n non-English speaking areas. A chi-square s t a t i s t i c computed on the treatment-control proportions produced a value of 0.6 which f a i l e d to r e j e c t the n u l l hypothesis that the 34 TABLE 2 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN CANADA Years Treatment Control T o t a l No % No '% No % 26 or more 52 38.5 118 63.1 170 52.8 6 - 2 5 73 54.1 64 34.2 137 42.5 5 or l e s s 10 7.4 5 2.7 15 4.7 To t a l 135 100.0 (41.9) 187 100.0 (58.1) 322 100.0 No Response = 2(0.6%) Means: Treatment = 26.2 Control =32.8 t = 4.3; df = 320; p< .01 TABLE 3 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY AREA OF ORIGIN Area of O r i g i n Treatment Control T o t a l No % No % No % Englis h speaking 112 83.6 165 87.3 277 85.8 Non-English speaking 22 16.4 24 12.7 46 14.2 T o t a l 134 100.0 (41.5) 189 100.0 (58.5) 323 100.0 Chi-square = 0.6; df = l ; N.S. • No Response = 1(0.3%) 35 d i f f e r e n c e s i n observed proportions were due to chance alone. Educational Level It i s apparent from Figure 2 that l i t t l e d i f f e r e n c e existed between the treatment and co n t r o l groups i n the number of p a r t i c i p a n t s who had completed a l l , or part of, a high school programme. The observed percentages f o r the treatment and c o n t r o l groups were 67.2 and 64.3 r e s p e c t i v e l y . Only 6.7 percent of the treatment group occurred i n the 5 to 8 year category, while 16 percent of the c o n t r o l was found i n t h i s range. Of the c o n t r o l group, 19.7 percent had received some post-secondary education, while 26.1 percent of the treatment had achieved a s i m i l a r l e v e l . The mean l e v e l of education was 11.9 years f o r the treatment and 11.2 years f o r the c o n t r o l . A t-value of 2.59, which was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l , was obtained from the s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s of t h i s mean d i f f e r e n c e . The c o e f f i c i e n t obtained from c o r r e l a t i n g educational l e v e l with the post-t e s t scores was 0.36 and was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l . This i n d i c a t e s that treatment-control d i f f e r e n c e s of years of schooling may have had some influence on the post-test scores. Proportion of Salary Earned from P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n Sixty-seven of the 324 short course p a r t i c i p a n t s f a i l e d to i n d i c a t e the proportion of income obtained during the past twelve months which was derived from the a p p l i c a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s (Table 4). Of those who responded, two-thirds (67.1 %) of the c o n t r o l and 58.6 percent of the t r e a t -ment reported that none of t h e i r income was obtained from t h i s source because FIGURE 2 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY EDUCATIONAL LEVEL TREATMENT Range (Years Completed) 9(6.7%) 5 - 8 CONTROL 30(16.0%) 48(35.8%) 64(34.0%) " 7 / 9 - 1 1 11 42(31.4%) 57(30.3%) 12 35(26.1%) 13 or more 37(19.7%) MEANS: Treatment = 11.9 TOTALS: Treatment = 134 Control = 11.2 Control = 187 No response = 2 t = 2.59; df = 320; p< .01. 37 they were e i t h e r unemployed or were s t a r t i n g i n the business. One-quarter (25.3%) of the former group reported that part of t h e i r income was derived from t h i s source and 7.6 percent reported i t as accounting for a l l of t h e i r income. One-third (32.3%) of the l a t t e r group reported some, and 9.1 percent reported a l l t h e i r income during t h i s period was obtained from these endeavours. The mean sal a r y percentages received from p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n was 30.8 f o r the treatment and 28.1 for the c o n t r o l . A t - t e s t c a l c u l a t e d on t h i s mean d i f f e r e n c e produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t value of 0.72 which f a i l e d to r e j e c t the n u l l hypothesis that these means di d not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y . C o r r e l a t i o n of t h i s v a r i a b l e with the post-test scores produced a non-s i g n i f i c a n t Pearson r of 0.11 which indi c a t e d that these values v a r i e d independently of the p o s t - t e s t scores. Years of Experience as a P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t o r Over o n e - f i f t h (21.7%) of the p a r t i c i p a n t s f a i l e d to respond to t h i s item and were excluded from the analyses (Table 5 ) . Approximately one-third (31.6%) of the treatment group reported no previous experience as commercial p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r s ; one-half (52.1%) reported one to ten years of experience; and the remaining 16.3 percent, more than 10 years. Almost one-half (49.4%) of the c o n t r o l group had no previous experience, one-third (34.9%) had one to ten years, and 15.7 percent had more than 10 years. The mean years of experience were 5.2 for the treatment and 4.9 f o r the c o n t r o l . This mean d i f f e r e n c e produced a t-value of 0.32 i n d i c a t i n g the means were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r . This v a r i a b l e also displayed a very weak c o r r e l a t i o n with the post-test scores (r = 0.07). 38 TABLE 4 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY PORTION OF INCOME OBTAINED FROM THE APPLICATION OF PESTICIDES Portion of Wage Treatment Control T o t a l No % No % No % A l l 9 9.1 12 7.6 21 8.2 Part 32 32.3 40 25.3 72 28.0 None 58 58.6 106 67.1 164 63.9 To t a l 99 100.0 (38.5) 158 100.0 (61.5) 257 100.0 No Response = 67(20.7%) Means: Treatment = 30.8 Control = 28.1 t = 0.72; df = 255; N.S. TABLE 5 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY YEARS OF EXPERIENCE Years of Experience Treatment Control T o t a l No % No % No % 11 or more 19 16.3 26 15.7 45 15.8 1 - 1 0 61 52.1 58 34.9 119 42.1 None 37 31.6 82 49.4 119 42.1 T o t a l 117 100.0 (41.3) 166 100.0 (58.7) 283 100.0 No Response = 41(21.7%) Means: Treatment = 5.2 Control =4.9 t = 0.32; df = 281; N.S. 39 Employment Status Sixteen percent of the treatment group were employed as commercial p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r s on a full-time b a s i s , while 84 percent were part-time (Table 6). A s i m i l a r proportion was observed i n the c o n t r o l , with 17.6 percent responding as f u l l - t i m e and 82.4 percent as part-time a p p l i c a t o r s . One-fourth of the t o t a l number of p a r t i c i p a n t s were excluded from these pro-portions because of t h e i r f a i l u r e to respond to t h i s item, A chi-square computed on these values produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t value of 0.02 which indic a t e d the observed proportions were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from each other. A mere 7.8 percent of the treatment group were self-employed, while 92.2 percent were employed by someone else (Table 7). The c o n t r o l group was composed of 17.2 percent of the former and 82.8 percent of the l a t t e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . The seventeen i n d i v i d u a l s who f a i l e d to respond to t h i s item were excluded from the a n a l y s i s . A chi-square computed on the remaining data produced a value of 5.1. Although t h i s value was s i g n i f i c a n t at the f i v e percent l e v e l i t i s improbable that the f u l l - t i m e or part-time employment status v a r i a b l e , independently, had much e f f e c t on the post-test r e s u l t s . Pearson 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 to te s t the c o r r e l a t i o n between these employment status v a r i a b l e s and the post-test r e s u l t s were not computed as the employment status v a r i a b l e s are neither continuous nor i n t e r v a l . Attendance at Related Short Courses and Number of P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n  C e r t i f i c a t e s Held Only 21.5 percent of the treatment and 18 percent of the c o n t r o l 40 TABLE 6 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY FULL OR PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT STATUS Status Treatment Control T o t a l No % No % No % Fu l l - t i m e 17 16.0 24 17.6 41 16.9 Part-time 89 84.0 112 82.4 201 83.1 T o t a l 106 100.0 (43.8) 136 100.0 (56.2) 242 100.0 Chi-square = 0.02; df = 1; N.S. No Response or Unemployed = 82(25.3%) TABLE 7 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY EMPLOYMENT STATUS Status Treatment Control T o t a l No % No % No % Self-employed 10 7.8 31 17 .2 41 13.3 Employee 119 92.2 149 82 .8 268 86.7 T o t a l 129 100.0 180 100 .0 309 100.0 (41.7) (58 • 3) Chi-square = 5.1; df = 1 ; p< .05 No Response = 17(5.3%) 41 groups had previously p a r t i c i p a t e d i n s i m i l a r BCDA sponsored short courses whereas one-fourth (25.9%) of the former and 17.6 percent of the l a t t e r had p a r t i c i p a t e d i n s i m i l a r courses sponsored by a g r i c u l t u r a l organizations other than the BCDA. (Tables 8 and 9). The e n t i r e group of 324 i n d i v i d u a l s responded to the f i r s t item, while two p a r t i c i p a n t s f a i l e d to respond to the second and were consequently removed from a l l analyses i n t h i s sub-section. A chi-square value was c a l c u l a t e d f o r both v a r i a b l e s but neither proved s i g n i f i -cant, thereby f a i l i n g to r e j e c t the n u l l hypothesis that the d i f f e r e n c e s i n the observed proportions were due e n t i r e l y to random chance. The i n d i v i d u a l s of the treatment c o n d i t i o n had attended a mean of 0.3 previous BCDA courses and 0.2 non-BCDA courses, while the c o n t r o l group attended a mean of 0.2 courses of both types. A t - t e s t c a l c u l a t e d on the mean d i f f e r e n c e s between treatment and c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s on previous non-BCDA course p a r t i c i p a t i o n produced a t value of 2.24 which was only s i g n i f i c a n t at the f i v e percent l e v e l - This v a r i a b l e , when c o r r e l a t e d with the p o s t - t e s t , produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t r value of 0.07 which suggested that i t d i d not contribute s i g n i f i c a n t l y to the variance of the p o s t - t e s t . I t was not necessary to conduct a t - t e s t on the previous BCDA sponsored course p a r t i c i p a t i o n treatment-control d i f f e r e n c e as t h i s equalled zero. This v a r i a b l e also c o r r e l a t e d n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the post-test (r = 0.08). From Table 10 i t can be seen that of the 323 p a r t i c i p a n t s who provided the number of BCDA p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n c e r t i f i c a t e s p reviously held, almost three-fourths (73.1%) of the treatment and f o u r - f i f t h s (79.9%) of the c o n t r o l group admitted having none. This meant that 26.9 percent of the treatment and 20.1 percent of the c o n t r o l p a r t i c i p a n t s held one or 42 TABLE 8 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY PREVIOUS BCDA COURSE ATTENDANCE Previous Attendance Treatment Control Total No % No % No % Participation 29 21.5 34 18.0 63 19.4 No p a r t i c i -pation 106 78.5 155 82.0 261 80.6 Total 135 100.0 (41.7) 189 100.0 (58.3) 324 100.0 Chi-square = 0.4; df = 1; N.S. Means: Treatment = 0.2 Control =0.2 TABLE 9 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY PREVIOUS ATTENDANCE AT RELATED , NON-BCDA SPONSORED COURSES Previous Attendance Treatment Control Total No % No % No % Participation 35 25.9 33 17.6 68 21.1 No p a r t i c i -pation 100 74.1 154 82.4 254 78.9 Total 135 100.0 (41.9) 187 100.0 (58.1) 322 100.0 Chi-square = 2.7; df = 1; N.S. No Response = 2(0.6%) Means: Treatment = 0.3 Control =0.2 t = 2.24; df = 320; p< .05. 43 TABLE 10 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES HELD Certificates Held Treatment Control Total No % No % No % 1 or more 36 26.9 38 20.1 74 22.9 None 98 73.1 151 79.9 249 77.1 Total 134 100.0 (41.5) 189 100.0 (58.5) 323 100.0 Chi-square = 1.7; df = 1 ; N.S. No Response = 1(0.3%) Means: Treatment = 0.4 Control =0.3 t = 1.13; df - 321; N.S. TABLE 11 PEARSON PRODUCT-MOMENT CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF THREE MEASURES OF PARTICIPATION Previous BCDA Course Attendance Previous non-BCDA Sponsored Course Attendance Certificates Held Previous BCDA Course Attendance 1.00 Previous non-BCDA Sponsored Course Attendance .28** 1.00 Certificates Held .54** .40** 1.00 ** Significant at the .01 leve l . 44 more of these c e r t i f i c a t e s . The mean numbers of c e r t i f i c a t e s previously held were 0.4 for the treatment and 0.3 f o r the c o n t r o l . One i n d i v i d u a l i n the former group held 6 and two of the l a t t e r held 4 each. A chi-square computed on the proportion of i n d i v i d u a l s holding previous c e r t i f i c a t e s i n the respective experimental conditions produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t value of 1.7 which indi c a t e d that the observed r a t i o s i n both conditions were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r . A t - t e s t conducted on the d i f f e r e n c e of the two mean values provided a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t of 1.13 which f a i l e d to r e j e c t the n u l l hypothesis that the means were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r . Although the number of c e r t i f i c a t e s held c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the post-t e s t r e s u l t s (r = 0.17) there was no d i f f e r e n t i a l e f f e c t due to assignment of experimental c o n d i t i o n as both the chi-square and the t - t e s t s were not s i g n i f i c a n t . The number of BCDA and non-BCDA courses of s i m i l a r content attended by a l l the i n d i v i d u a l s of the study c o r r e l a t e d at the .01 l e v e l (r = 0.28), Higher c o e f f i c i e n t s of 0.54 and 0.4, r e s p e c t i v e l y , were obtained when each of these v a r i a b l e s was c o r r e l a t e d with the number of c e r t i f i c a t e s held (Table 11). Both were s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e that these three measures were hig h l y i n t e r -c o r r e l a t e d and probably measured the same f a c t o r such as a general measure of need to p a r t i c i p a t e r e s u l t i n g from e i t h e r an i n t e r e s t i n the subject matter or a p r o f e s s i o n a l need to acquire a d d i t i o n a l c e r t i f c a t e s , and know-ledge, consequently r e s u l t i n g i n increased attendance at s i m i l a r short courses. i 45 Summary This chapter consists of the analysis of the socio-economic data. The f i r s t v a r i a b l e considered was age of p a r t i c i p a n t s . The con-t r o l mean age of 37.6 years was s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than the treatment mean of 32.5 years at the .01 l e v e l . This v a r i a b l e was considered to have l i t t l e e f f e c t upon the post-test scores since i t did not s i g n i f i -cantly c o r r e l a t e with them. As expected, length of residence i n Canada was hig h l y correlated with age (r = 0.71). This v a r i a b l e also d i d not s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e with the post - t e s t scores. The mean length of residence was 26.2 years f o r the treatment and 32.8 years f o r the c o n t r o l . The greatest numbers of p a r t i c i p a n t s were born i n English-speaking coun-t r i e s , with 83.6 percent of the treatment and 87.6 percent of the c o n t r o l originated from these areas. A chi-square s t a t i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d upon the proportions was not s i g n i f i c a n t . Mean educational l e v e l was 11.9 years f o r the treatment and 11.2 years f o r the c o n t r o l . This d i f f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l . Since t h i s v a r i a b l e c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the post - t e s t at the .01 l e v e l i t had some influence upon the post-test. Mean proportion of previous year's s a l a r y derived from p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n was 30.8 percent f o r the treatment and 28.1 percent f o r the con t r o l . This d i f f e r e n c e was not large enough to produce a s i g n i f i c a n t t-value. The treatment had a mean of 5.2 years previous experience and the c o n t r o l 4.9 years. A t - s t a t i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d on these means was also not s i g n i f i c a n t . S l i g h t l y over f o u r - f i f t h s of both the treatment and the c o n t r o l were operating as p e s t i c i d e applicators on a part-time b a s i s . Only 7.8 percent of the former and 17.7 percent of the l a t t e r were self-employed, the remainder were employees. Although t h i s pro-portion produced a chi-square value s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , i t was considered that t h i s v a r i a b l e had no d i r e c t e f f e c t on the post-test. Both the treatment and the c o n t r o l had previously p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a mean of 0.2 BCDA-sponsored short courses. The treatment group previously p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a mean of 0.3 s i m i l a r courses sponsored by groups other than the BCDA while the c o n t r o l p a r t i c i p a t e d i n 0.2. The number of c e r t i f i c a t e s already held was 0.4 f o r the treatment and 0.3 fo r the c o n t r o l . Neither of these mean diff e r e n c e s produced a s i g n i -f i c a n t t-value. A high degree of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n was observed f o r these three v a r i a b l e s which probably measured a common fac t o r such as a general need to p a r t i c i p a t e . CHAPTER IV PRE-TESTING AND HANDBOOK UTILIZATION Introduction This chapter deals with the data obtained from the individuals as a result of their participating in the short courses. The f i r s t considera-tion i s given to a rationale which allowed the combining of groups of similar topic and treatment. The results discussed in this chapter are primarily those which were obtained from combining the eight treatment groups with each other and combining the eight control groups with each other to form one treatment and one control group. It explores the source from which participants obtained the pre-course handbooks and the amount of use to which they were put. Also analyzed are the pre-test, the post-test, and the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination mean scores. The chapter concludes with a regression analysis which attempts to determine which factor primarily influenced the post-test scores. Special emphasis was given to the effect of the pre-test upon the post-test. Rationale for Combining Groups of Similar Experimental Condition The concern of this chapter is with the influence of varied experi-mental conditions upon the post-test and not with non-significant differences among groups of similar experimental condition. Therefore, the data are presented as one treatment and one control for each of the six topics. Both the three Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement treatment courses and the 47 48 three c o n t r o l courses of the N o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l , Non-forestry Vegetation Control were combined. I t was considered that the three combined Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement courses were s i m i l a r since a l l received the same experimental con d i t i o n and a one-way analysis of variance on both the pre-test and post-test mean scores r e s u l t e d i n n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t o v e r a l l F - r a t i o s of 0.42 and 0.95 r e s p e c t i v e l y , i n d i c a t i n g no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e among the means (Appendix 4). A s i m i l a r r a t i o n a l e and t e s t conducted on the post-test means of the three groups assigned the c o n t r o l condition of the Non-agricultural, Non-forestry Vegetation Control t o p i c produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t o v e r a l l F - r a t i o of 0.26 (Appendix 5). E f f e c t s of Handbook U t i l i z a t i o n A regression a n a l y s i s was c a l c u l a t e d on the data c o l l e c t e d from a l l 324 p a r t i c i p a n t s with pre-test as the dependent v a r i a b l e and p o s t - t e s t v a r i a b l e deleted from the a n a l y s i s . The f i r s t v a r i a b l e removed from the l i s t of p o t e n t i a l independent v a r i a b l e s was the number of c e r t i f i c a t e s held, which accounted f o r 9.5 percent of the pre-test variance. In the next step the i n t e n s i t y of handbook use was added to the equation with an increase of the r e s u l t i n g explained variance to 14.7 percent. The handbook use -pre-test c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of 0.27 was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l . It i s apparent that the extent to which the pre-course handbook material was u t i l i z e d p o s i t i v e l y influenced the pre-test scores. This suggests that these materials increased the p a r t i c i p a n t s ' pre-entry scores but had no e f f e c t upon t h e i r post-test scores as previously discussed. It i s important to note that the degree of u t i l i z a t i o n of the hand-book material had a s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e e f f e c t on the post-test only to 49 those p a r t i c i p a n t s who did not complete the pre-test but was not a s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r upon the post-test scores of those who d i d . This suggests that the p a r t i c i p a n t s should be administered e i t h e r the pre-test or the handbook m a t e r i a l , as the l a t t e r becomes unimportant when the former i s presented. Source of and P a r t i c i p a n t Use of Pre-course Handbooks Of the 312 p a r t i c i p a n t s who revealed t h e i r source of pre-course handbook materials, 101 admitted not having obtained them (Table 12). This represented 40.8 percent of the treatment and 26 percent of the c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s . There were 59.2 percent of the treatment group who admitted having received the books, with 45.9 percent of these claiming possession of a set and 13.3 percent having borrowed copies. Almost three-fourths (74%) of the c o n t r o l group had obtained copies of the material, with 16.4 percent having borrowed them and 57.6 percent owning t h e i r own s e t s . A chi-square test was performed on the proportion of p a r t i c i p a n t s having access to a set of handbooks. This computation produced a value of 7.6 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .025 l e v e l . This caused r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis that d i f f e r e n c e s i n observed proportions were due e n t i r e l y to chance and acceptance of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that a s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r proportion of the c o n t r o l group had access to the handbooks. Table 13 shows that only s i x p a r t i c i p a n t s f a i l e d to i n d i c a t e t h e i r i n t e n s i t y of handbook use. Only two i n d i v i d u a l s of the 103 who f a i l e d to u t i l i z e the handbooks admitted having received them but had f a i l e d to use them, while the remainder contended they had not received them at a l l . These accounted for 40.7 percent of the treatment but only 26.2 percent of c o n t r o l . so TABLE 12 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY SOURCE OF PRE-COURSE HANDBOOKS Source of Handbooks Treatment Control Total No % No % No % Owned by Participant 62 45.9 102 57.6 164 52.6 Borrowed 18 13.3 29 16.4 47 15.1 Not received 55 40.8 46 26.0 101 32.3 Total 135 100.0 (43.3) 177 100.0 (56.7) 312 100.0 Chi-square = 7.6; df = 2; p< .025 No response = 12(3.7%) TABLE 13 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY PRE-COURSE HANDBOOK USE Handbook Use Treatment Control Total No. % No. % No. % Read more than once 27 20.0 57 31.2 84 26.4 Read once 53 39.3 78 42.6 131 41.2 Not received* 55 40.7 48 26.2 103 32.4 135 100.0 (42.5) 183 100.0 (57.5) 318 100.0 * Of the 103 in this category, 101 did not receive the handbooks. Two (2) people, although receiving handbooks, did not u t i l i z e them. Chi-square = 8.9; df = 2; p< .02 Means: Treatment =2.9 No Response = 6(1.9%) Control =3.3 t = 2.23; df = 316; p< .05 51 Within the treatment group 39.3 percent had read the material once and only o n e - f i f t h read them more i n t e n s i v e l y whereas 46.2 percent of the c o n t r o l read them once and 31.2 percent read them more than once. A c h i -square s t a t i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d on these proportions produced a value of 8.9 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .02 l e v e l . This r e s u l t e d i n the r e j e c t i o n of the n u l l hypothesis that chance alone accounted f o r the d i f f e r e n c e s i n observed proportions i n favour of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that the c o n t r o l i n d i v i d u a l s u t i l i z e d the handbook material more i n t e n s i v e l y than did those of the treatment. On a scale of one to f i v e , where one i n d i c a t e d no use of the m a t e r i a l and f i v e i n d i c a t e d i n t e n s i v e study, a mean value of 2.9 was obtained for the treatment and 3.3 f o r the c o n t r o l . A t - t e s t c a l c u l a t e d on t h i s d i f f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the f i v e percent l e v e l (t = 2.23) which r e s u l t e d i n the acceptance of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that the c o n t r o l group studied the handbook material more i n t e n s i v e l y than d i d the treatment group. C o r r e l a t i n g the values obtained on t h i s scale with the p o s t - t e s t scores produced a n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t c o e f f i c i e n t of 0.095 which indi c a t e d those who i n t e n s i v e l y studied the handbook m a t e r i a l did not achieve a correspondingly higher p o s t - t e s t score. Pre-test Scores The 135 p a r t i c i p a n t s who were assigned the treatment condition were the only i n d i v i d u a l s to receive the p r e - t e s t . Of t h i s group, 13.3 percent completed l e s s than 19 of 30 items c o r r e c t l y , 51.9 percent achieved 19 to 24 c o r r e c t , and 34.8 percent scores 25 or higher (Table 14). C o r r e l a t i o n of the pre-test with the p o s t - t e s t scores re s u l t e d i n an r-value of 0.54 52 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .01 l e v e l . This r e s u l t indicated that those i n d i v i d u a l s who scored w e l l on the pre-test scored w e l l on the post-te s t and the pre-test exerted a s i g n i f i c a n t i nfluence upon the post-test variance. I t further suggests that the p a r t i c i p a n t s were s e r i o u s l y com-p l e t i n g the p r e - t e s t . C e r t i f i c a t i o n Examination The c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination which contained the 30 items of the post-test was completed by a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s at the conclusion of each short course. The length of examination v a r i e d from 155 to 232 item responses depending upon the topic of the examination. Adequate time was provided f o r the completion of these examinations; approximately one hour and a h a l f was required. Table 15 shows that 95.6 percent of the treatment i n d i v i d u a l s s u c c e s s f u l l y surpassed the 65 percent passing grade while 4.4 percent d i d not. The controls exhibited a r e l a t i v e l y s i m i l a r proportion with 89.9 percent passing the threshold minimum of success and 10.1 percent f a i l i n g . A c h i -square test was performed on these proportions which r e s u l t e d i n a non-s i g n i f i c a n t value of 2.7. The mean scores obtained were 83.41 and 81.43 f o r the treatment and c o n t r o l groups r e s p e c t i v e l y . A t - t e s t conducted on t h e i r d i f f e r e n c e r e s u l t e d i n a value of 2.7 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the f i v e percent l e v e l . These two r e s u l t s suggested that although the r a t i o s of successes achieved by each group were not s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t , the treatment group demonstrated a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher score on t h i s c e r t i f i c a -t i o n examination than d i d the c o n t r o l . The t h i r t y item post-test r e s u l t s were c o r r e l a t e d with the c e r t i f i -c a t i o n examination, r e s u l t i n g i n an r-value of 0.71 which was s i g n i f i c a n t 53 TABLE 14 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE TREATMENT CONDITION BY PRE-TEST SCORES* Score Treatment No. % 25 - 30 47 34.8 19 - 24 70 51.9 Less than 19 18 13.3 Total: 135 100.0 * Control groups received no pre-test Mean: Treatment = 22.8 TABLE 15 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY CERTIFICATION SCORES Percentage Achieved Treatment Control Total No. % No % No. % 65 or over* 129 95.6 170 89.9 299 92.3 64 or less 6 4.4 19 10.1 25 7.7 Total 135 100.0 (41.7) 189 100.0 (58.3) 324 100.0 * 65 percent i s the o f f i c i a l grade necessary to be awarded a c e r t i f i c a t e . Chi-square = 2.7; df = 1; N.S. Means: Treatment = 83.41 Control = 81.43 t = 1.7; df = 322; p< .05 54 well beyond the .01 lev e l . A multiple regression containing a l l continuous, interval variables as independent variables and the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination results as the dependent variable indicated that the post-test results alone accounted for 50.4 percent of the total variance. These results confirm the assumption that the post-test and the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations measured the same variable and that the thirty item post-test i s a good random sample of the larger examinations which are excluded from further consideration. Post-test There were 8.5 percent of the control group who answered less than 19 of the thirty post-test items correctly, while 24.3 percent scored 19 to 24 and 67.2 percent attained a higher score (Table 16). Of the treatment group, 2.2 percent scores less than 19 correct, 15.6 percent achieved 19 to 24 and four-fifths (82.2%) attained over 25 correct (cf. Table 14). A chi-square value of 10.6 was obtained for the observed treatment and control ratios. This was significant beyond the .01 level which resulted in accep-tance of the alternative hypothesis that the cifferences in the proportions observed were due to factors other than chance. The mean number of items answered correctly was 26.8 by the treatment group and 25.1 by the control. A t-test conducted on this difference produced a value of 4.8 which was highly significant, (p< .0005). This caused rejection of the null hypothesis that the two means were similar in favour of the alternative hypothesis that the treatment mean was significantly higher than the control mean. Such a low probability (p< .0005) of obtaining a t-value of this magnitude indicates that there i s v i r t u a l l y no p o s s i b i l i t y that chance alone produced such a mean difference. 55 Analysis of the Means The pre-test means from the s i x groups which received the treatment condition were subjected to a one-way ana l y s i s of variance. This produced an F - r a t i o of 1.92, with 5 and 129 degrees of freedom, which was not s t a t i s -t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t (Appendix 6). This r e s u l t upheld the n u l l hypothesis that the s i x pre-test means were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r which i n d i c a t e s that members of the s i x i n d i v i d u a l groups had s i m i l a r pre-course knowledge of the m a t e r i a l , and further j u s t i f i e s combining these groups i n t o one treatment con d i t i o n . As a consequence, i t can be assumed that changes i n the mean scores of these i n d i v i d u a l s were a r e s u l t of the conditions which occurred during the intervening period which was dominated by the short courses. By a further extension we can assume that the i n d i v i d u a l s assigned to the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n also possessed s i m i l a r knowledge p r i o r to attending the short courses because of the large number of p a r t i c i p a n t s involved and because there was no reason to assume there would be any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the groups, and none of the personal, pre-course v a r i a b l e s except the observed treatment-control d i f f e r e n c e s i n educational l e v e l between the two groups appeared s i g n i f i c a n t . The pre-test mean of the treatment group was 22.8 items corr e c t of a p o s s i b l e 30, whereas the mean increased to 26.8 on the post-test (Table 17). A c o r r e l a t e d t - t e s t conducted on these d i f f e r e n c e s r e s u l t e d i n a value of 13.6 which was s i g n i f i c a n t w e l l beyond the .0005 l e v e l . This r e s u l t caused the n u l l hypothesis to be rejected i n favour of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that the post-test mean was s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than the pre-test mean. 56 TABLE 16 PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS BY POST-TEST SCORE Score Treatment Control Total No. % No. % No. % 25 - 30 I l l 82.2 127 67.2 238 73.4 19 - 24 21 15.6 46 24.3 67 20.7 Less than 19 3 2.2 16 8.5 19 5.9 Total 135 100.0 (41.7) 189 100.0 (58.3) 324 100.0 Chi-square = 10.6; df = 2; p< .01 Means: Treatment = 26.8 Control = 25.1 t = 4.8; df = 322; p< .0005 TABLE 17 MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, SAMPLE SIZES AND CORRELATED T-TEST RESULTS OF PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST DATA FOR TREATMENT GROUP Mean Standard Deviation t-test Post-test 26.8 2.8 13.6; p< .0005 Pre-test 22.8 4.0 n = 135 57 The r e s u l t s of co r r e l a t e d t - t e s t s c a l c u l a t e d on the i n d i v i d u a l treatment short course p r e - t e s t / p o s t - t e s t mean di f f e r e n c e s i n d i c a t e d that each post-test i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y higher than i t s corresponding pre-test beyond the .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e (Table 18). These s i g n i f i c a n t t e s t s r e s u l t e d i n the r e j e c t i o n of the c o l l e c t i v e n u l l hypothesis that pre-test and post-test means were s i m i l a r , i n favour of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that post-test means were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than t h e i r corresponding pre-test means. The independent t - t e s t s that were c a l c u l a t e d on the treatment-control mean di f f e r e n c e s of each short course t o p i c were not quite so c l e a r cut i n t h e i r r e s u l t s (Table 17). The post-test treatment-control mean d i f f e r e n c e s of the Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement and Forest or Forest-product Pest Abatement short courses produced t - t e s t values of 4.2 and 3.7 respec-t i v e l y . Both of these values were s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .01 l e v e l and indica t e d that the p a r t i c i p a n t s who were assigned the treatment cond i t i o n scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the post-test than d i d those i n the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n . The p a r t i c i p a n t s assigned the treatment cond i t i o n of the A g r i c u l t u r a l - c r o p Pest Abatement and S t r u c t u r a l Pest Control short courses achieved higher post-test mean scores than d i d those i n the c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , although not s i g n i f i c a n t l y so, while the treatment mean score of the Non-agricultural and Non-forestry Vegetation Cont r o l , and Mosquito and B i t i n g - f l y Abatement i n d i v i d u a l s was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than t h e i r c o n t r o l counterparts. The r e s u l t of combining a l l groups into a treatment and c o n t r o l condition r e s u l t e d i n a treatment mean of 26.8 and a co n t r o l mean of 25.1 (Table 16). The t - t e s t that was ca l c u l a t e d on t h i s d i f f e r e n c e produced a 58 TABLE 18 SAMPLE SIZE, STANDARD DEVIATIONS, MEANS AND T-TEST RESULTS OBTAINED FROM PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SCORES FROM TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS OF EACH COURSE TOPIC Pre--test Post -test t - t e s t s Landscape & Garden Pest Abatement: Treatment (N=47) Control (N=52) Mean Standard Deviation Mean Standard Deviation 22.9 * 3.5 * 26.3 23.6 2.4 4.1 t=8.4; p< t=4,2; p< .01** ,01*** Forest or Forest-product Pest Abatement: Treatment (N=41) Control (N=34) 23.2 * 3.4 * 28.3 26.5 1.3 2.5 t=12.1;p< t=3.7; P< .01** .01*** Non-agricultural and Non-Forestry Vegetation C o n t r o l : Treatment (N=12) Control (N=57) 20.7 * 3.6 * 24.4 24.8 4.2 3.6 t=6.9; p< t=-0.26;N. .01** g. *** Ag r i c u l t u r a l - c r o p Pest Abatement: Treatment (N=17) Control (N=23) 22.7 * 6.2 * 26.1 25.7 3.2 3.4 t=2.9; p< t=0.35; N. .01** s. *** S t r u c t u r a l Pest Control: Treatment (N=10) Control (N=12) 25.3 * 4.5 * 28.0 26.8 2.5 2.4 t=3.0; p< t = l . l ; N.S .01** *** Mosquite and B i t i n g - f l y Abatement: Treatment (N=8) Control (N=ll) 21.0 * 3.5 * 25.6 26.5 3.9 3.5 t=8.4; p< t=-0.48;N. .01** s .*** * Pre-test was not administered to control group. ** Correlated t-test between treatment pre-test/post-test mean difference. *** Independent t-test between treatment and control post-test mean difference. 59 value of 4.8 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .0005 l e v e l , c l e a r l y r e j e c t i n g the n u l l hypothesis that the treatment mean was s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r to the c o n t r o l mean, i n favour of the a l t e r n a t i v e hypothesis that the treatment mean was higher than the c o n t r o l mean. In view of the overwhelmingly superior performance of the o v e r a l l treatment group, the somewhat negative r e s u l t s obtained from the Non-a g r i c u l t u r a l and Non-forestry Vegetation Control and Mosquite and B i t i n g -f l y Abatement groups can be dismissed as a t y p i c a l cases i n themselves, but are necessary f o r i n c l u s i o n i n the o v e r a l l study as they met the basic requirement c r i t e r i a f o r i n c l u s i o n . The a t y p i c a l r e s u l t s of the former group can be explained on the basis of the d i s p a r i t y of sample s i z e s . With the treatment s i z e of 57 and a c o n t r o l of only 12 there was a considerable p r o b a b i l i t y that the c o n t r o l group d i s t r i b u t i o n would be skewed. Another important consideration was the f a c t that the treatment group consisted of a rather s p e c i a l i z e d group of B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Highways employees who resided i n the Vancouver area and were of s l i g h t l y higher mean age and educational l e v e l but had a lower rate of handbook u t i l i z a t i o n than the c o n t r o l . None of these d i f f e r e n c 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 . The Mosquito and B i t i n g - f l y Abatement c o n t r o l group's higher post-te s t scores might be a t t r i b u t e d to the extremely small sample s i z e s of 8 and 11 for treatment and c o n t r o l r e s p e c t i v e l y . This e f f e c t may have been furth e r amplified by the f a c t that the treatment group had a lower educa-t i o n a l l e v e l and a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher age and handbook u t i l i z a t i o n r a t e than the c o n t r o l . 60 Regression Analyses Several multiple regression analysis were calculated on various portions of the data u t i l i z i n g the STPREG routine of the U.B.C. T r i -angular Regression Package (TRIP) computer programme in an effort to determine which variables contributed significantly to the post-test variance. Calculation of a stepwise regression u t i l i z i n g the data obtained from a l l 324 participants and a five percent level of significance deter-mined that the pre-test and educational level were the only variables to significantly contribute to the post-test variance (Table 19). This analysis indicated the pre-test accounted for the largest proportion (29.5%) of the total variance, while the addition of educational level variable and the resulting interaction increased this to only 38.3 per-cent. Correlation of pre-test with post-test produced a coefficient of 0.54 which was considerably greater than the educational level/post-test coefficient of 0.36, although both were significant at the .01 level (Table 20). It is apparent from these two analyses that the pre-test variable accounted for a greater proportion of the post-test v a r i -ance than did the educational level variable, although both were signi-ficant. The total pooled data were.then separated into treatment and control data for separate analysis. A correlation matrix and a stepwise regression were produced u t i l i z i n g the 135 treatment individuals. Here again, the coefficient produced as a result of correlating the pre-test with the post-test produced a value of 0.54 which was larger than that of any other variable considered with the post-test, including the one for educational level, which was half this magnitude (Appendix 3). 61 TABLE 19 RESULTS OF REGRESSION ANALYSES * Variables T o t a l / i of Explained Variance Treatment Years of Schooling Pre-test Score 34.4% Control Years of Schooling Intensity of Handbook Percent of Wages from cide a p p l i c a t i o n Use P e s t i -18.5% To t a l Years of Schooling Pre-test Score 38.3% ** Dependent v a r i a b l e was Post-test score. * T o t a l P o t e n t i a l V a r i a b l e s : Age Years of Schooling Courses, other than BCDA sponsored, previously attended Previous BCDA Courses Attended P e s t i c i d e C e r t i f i c a t e s Held Intensity of Pre-course Handbook Use Years of Experience as P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t o r Percent of Wages Earned from P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n during Review Year Years of Residency i n Canada Pre-test Score Level of S i g n i f i c a n c e («:) = .05 TABLE 20 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS FOR VARIABLES FOUND TO BE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTORS TO POST-TEST VARIANCE Treatment Post-test Control T o t a l Pre-test .54** N/A .54** Educational Level .28** .37** .36** Intensity of Handbook Use .03 .19** .10 Percent of Wages from P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n .07 .12* .10 * s i g . at .05 l e v e l ** s i g . at .01 l e v e l 62 The f i r s t v a r i a b l e removed by the stepwise regression routine at the .05 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e was, once again, the pre-test v a r i a b l e with i t s concomitant proportion of 29.5 percent of the post-test variance (Table 19). The explained variance was only increased to 34.4 percent by the second terminal step, which removed the educational l e v e l v a r i a b l e i n ad d i t i o n to the p r e - t e s t . This i n d i c a t e d that the pre-test accounted f o r the greatest proportion of post-test variance when the treatment group data were analyzed independently. A s i m i l a r s e r i e s of s t a t i s t i c a l analyses were c a r r i e d out on the data of the 189 p a r t i c i p a n t s who were assigned the c o n t r o l con-d i t i o n . Since t h i s group d i d not complete the p r e - t e s t , t h i s v a r i a b l e obviously was not included. Educational l e v e l was the f i r s t v a r i a b l e removed, accounting f o r 13.5 percent of the variance. In the next step, percentage of wage earned from commercial p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n was removed from the l i s t . I n t e n s i t y of pre-course handbook u t i l i z a t i o n was removed by the terminal step. A t o t a l of 18.5 percent of the po s t - t e s t variance was explained by these three v a r i a b l e s and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n (Table 19), The c o e f f i c i e n t c a l c u l a t e d when educational l e v e l was co r r e l a t e d with the post-test was 0.37, which was v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l to the c o e f f i c i e n t of 0.36 c a l c u l a t e d between these v a r i a b l e s u t i l i z i n g the e n t i r e set of data (Table 20). This intimates that disregarding the pre-test variance f a i l s to s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r the proportion of variance a t t r i b u t a b l e to educational l e v e l . I t i s also important to note that the i n t e n s i t y of the pre-course handbooks use i s a moderately s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a b l e i n the c o n t r o l group as 63 c a l c u l a t e d by the stepwise regression a n a l y s i s . This f a c t , coupled with a s i g n i f i c a n t i n t e n s i t y of handbooks use/post-test c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of 0.2 in d i c a t e s that the post-test scores of those p a r t i c i p a n t s who d i d not complete a pre-test were s i g n i f i c a n t l y influenced by t h i s v a r i a b l e , but once the p r e - t e s t was administered t h i s v a r i a b l e became n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t . Separation of Pre-te s t and Educational Level E f f e c t s A d d i t i o n a l regression analyses using d i f f e r e n t s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l s and manipulated independent v a r i a b l e s were conducted u t i l i z i n g the e n t i r e body.of data i n an e f f o r t to more c l e a r l y separate the pre-test e f f e c t from the educational l e v e l e f f e c t . The f i r s t a l t e r e d a n a l y s i s was c a r r i e d out with the s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l decreased to .10 from .05 to determine whether the s i g n i f i c a n c e of other v a r i a b l e s approached that of the pre-test and educational l e v e l v a r i a b l e s . Even at t h i s l e v e l these two v a r i a b l e s accounted f o r 38.3 percent of the variance with no a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s being added to the regression equation. This r e s u l t i n d i c a t e d that these two v a r i a b l e s t r u l y accounted f o r a very large proportion of the post-test variance since no others became s i g n i f i c a n t at t h i s rather low s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l . A furt h e r regression analysis c a l c u -l a t e d at a .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e produced i d e n t i c a l r e s u l t s . Since t h i s ploy f a i l e d to separate these v a r i a b l e s i t can be asserted that both are highly s i g n i f i c a n t contributors to the o v e r a l l variance, otherwise neither or only one would have been removed at t h i s high s i g n i f i c a n c e l e v e l . A very high degree of i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n was observed among three v a r i a b l e s : p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n non-BCDA sponsored p e s t i c i d e courses, number of 64 c e r t i f i c a t e s held, and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n BCDA sponsored courses (Table 21). These were deleted from one regression c a l c u l a t i o n since i t was pos s i b l e that t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n e f f e c t s could have exerted a greater influence on the post-test than t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l e f f e c t s . Again, the r e s u l t s were i d e n t i c a l to those observed u t i l i z i n g a l l v a r i a b l e s , i n d i c a t i n g the e f f e c t s of t h i s i n t e r c o r r e l a t i o n exerted no infl u e n c e beyond the sum of t h e i r e f f e c t s . A fur t h e r regression a n a l y s i s containing only those v a r i a b l e s which s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e d with the post-test was c a l c u l a t e d . This included educational l e v e l , p r e - t e s t scores, age, and number of c e r t i f i c a t e s held (Appendix 3). I d e n t i c a l r e s u l t s were again observed as only the pre-test and educational l e v e l v a r i a b l e s proved s i g n i f i c a n t , accounting f o r 38.3 percent of the t o t a l variance. In summary, i t can be asserted that the e f f e c t s of p r e - t e s t i n g and educational l e v e l were the only v a r i a b l e s s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c i n g the pos t - t e s t r e s u l t s . Although these were inseparable by manipulation of step-wise regression a n a l y s i s , the i n d i v i d u a l c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s i n d i c a t e d that the pre-test influence i s d e f i n i t e l y more pronounced. 65 TABLE 21 CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS OF SELECTED VARIABLES * Non-BCDA C e r t i f i c a t e s BCDA Courses Held Courses P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n non-BCDA Sponsored courses C e r t i f i c a t e s Held P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n BCDA-sponsored courses 1.0 .39 1.0 .28 .54 1.0 * A l l are s i g n i f i c a n t at .01 l e v e l . 66 Summary This chapter contains p r e - t e s t i n g and handbook u t i l i z a t i o n data and t h e i r e f f e c t upon the post - t e s t . Both the three Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement treatment groups and the three N o n - a g r i c u l t u r a l , Non-fo r e s t r y Vegetation Control c o n t r o l groups were combined to form one t r e a t -ment condition f o r the former and one c o n t r o l condition f o r the l a t t e r . This was r a t i o n a l i z e d on the basis of analyses of variance c a l c u l a t e d on both the pre-test and post- t e s t means of the Landscape and Garden Pest Abatement groups and the po s t - t e s t means of the Non- a g r i c u l t u r a l , Non-fo r e s t r y Vegetation Control c o n t r o l group. None of these analyses of variance produced a s i g n i f i c a n t F-value i n d i c a t i n g they were s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i m i l a r , thereby j u s t i f y i n g the grouping. A s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r proportion of the c o n t r o l had access to the handbook material than did the treatment. The former group also exhibited a s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher mean rate of handbook u t i l i z a t i o n of 3.3 on a s c a l e of 5. The treatment mean was 2.9. The mean rate of u t i l i z a t i o n f a i l e d to s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o r r e l a t e with the post-test i n d i -c a t i n g t h i s v a r i a b l e had l i t t l e e f f e c t upon the post- t e s t scores. The treatment group scored a mean of 22.8 correct of a p o s s i b l e 30 items. The pre-test c o r r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with the po s t - t e s t beyond the .01 l e v e l (r = 0.54). The c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination which contained the 30-item post-t e s t was completed by a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s . The mean scores attained were 83.41 and 81.43 for the treatment and c o n t r o l r e s p e c t i v e l y . A t-value of 2.7 cal c u l a t e d on the mean d i f f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .05 67 l e v e l . C o r r e l a t i o n of the pre-test with the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examination produced a s i g n i f i c a n t r-value of 0.71. This r e s u l t , plus the r e s u l t of a mult i p l e regression analysis confirmed the assumption that the 30-item t e s t i s a good random sample of the items contained on the la r g e r examination. Post-test mean score was 26.8 f o r the treatment and 22.8 f o r the co n t r o l . A t - s t a t i s t i c c a l c u l a t e d on t h i s d i f f e r e n c e produced a value of 4.8 which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .0005 l e v e l i n d i c a t i n g treatment scores were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than the c o n t r o l scores. I t was also found that the post- t e s t mean score of 26.8 was s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than the p r e - t e s t mean score of 22.8 beyond the .0005 l e v e l . Post-test mean scores attained by each treatment group were also s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than each corresponding p r e - t e s t score beyond the .01 l e v e l . Independent t - t e s t s c a l c u l a t e d on the treatment-control mean diffe r e n c e s of each short course t o p i c produced somewhat c o n f l i c t i n g r e s u l t s although the combined, o v e r a l l treatment-control mean d i f f e r e n c e was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .0005 l e v e l . A stepwise regression analysis c a l c u l a t e d on a l l the data using p o s t - t e s t as the dependent v a r i a b l e and a l l other continuous, i n t e r v a l v a r i a b l e s as independent r e s u l t e d i n both the pre - t e s t and educational l e v e l s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o n t r i b u t i n g to the po s t - t e s t v a r i a b l e at the .05 l e v e l . An i d e n t i c a l r e s u l t was obtained f o r the treatment data. However, educational l e v e l , i n t e n s i t y of handbook use, and percent of wages from p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t i o n were s i g n i f i c a n t contributors to the post- t e s t variance when the c o n t r o l data were analyzed. 68 Further regression analyses were calculated with altered s i g n i -ficance levels and manipulated independent variables in an effort to separate the effects of the pre-test and educational level. These manipu-lations proved f u t i l e indicating both were significant contributors. However, considering the pre-test-post-test and the educational l e v e l -post-test correlations i t appears the pre-test more definitely influenced the post-test. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Introduction The next section of this chapter summarizes the data. The socio-economic data are summarized f i r s t , followed by a discussion of the effects of the pre-test and the handbooks on the post-test. The last section consists of the conclusions drawn from the data. Summary This section summarizes the results reported i n Chapters III and IV which deal with the variables: age of participants, length of residence i n Canada, participants' area of origin, educational level, portion of previous year's income obtained from the application of pesti-cides, years of experience, f u l l or part-time employment status, s e l f -employed or employee, previous attendance at BCDA sponsored courses, previous attendance at related non-BCDA sponsored short courses, and the number of certificates held. It was found that although the control individuals were of a significantly higher age and of longer residence in Canada these va r i -ables failed to correlate significantly with the post-test scores i n d i -cating these two variables exerted no significant effect on the post-test results. There were no significant differences observed i n the 69 70 data of either the treatment or control group due to area of origin of participants. Educational level was significantly higher in the treatment than in the control and significantly, positively correlated with the post-test. This variable undoubtedly exerted some significant influence upon the post-test results. There was no significant d i f f e r e n t i a l post-test influence due to experimental condition encountered i n either the proportion of previous year's wages obtained from pesticide application, length of experience as a commercial pesticide applicator, or f u l l or part-time employment status variable. However, i t was determined that the proportion of those individuals who were self-employed was significantly higher in the control group but there i s l i t t l e reason to assume this dispropor-tionality unduly influenced the post-test. There were no significant treatment-control differences with reference to either the number of previous BCDA sponsored short courses attended or in the number of applicators' certificates previously obtained. The treatment group participated i n a significantly larger number of courses of similar content sponsored by non-BCDA groups. This variable failed to correlate significantly with the post-test which indicated i t s influence was negligible. A high degree of intercorrelation existed among these three variables which indicated a l l were measuring the same thing. It was found that a significantly larger number of control i n -dividuals had access to the pre-course handbook material. They also ut i l i z e d them more intensively than did the treatment group. The degree 71 of u t i l i z a t i o n of these materials s i g n i f i c a n t l y p o s i t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d with the post-test scores of those p a r t i c i p a n t s who d i d not complete the pre-test but had no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t upon those who completed a pre-test. The i n d i v i d u a l s assigned the treatment condition possessed s i m i -l a r pre-course knowledge of the pre - t e s t material. By p a r a l l e l thinking the c o n t r o l group should have possessed s i m i l a r knowledge. Results of t- t e s t s i n d i c a t e d that the mean post-test scores of the s i x i n d i v i d u a l treatment groups were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than t h e i r corresponding pre-test means beyond the .01 l e v e l of s i g n i f i c a n c e . Combination of the groups of l i k e experimental condition with each other produced a pre-and po s t - t e s t t - s t a t i s t i c which was s i g n i f i c a n t beyond the .005 l e v e l , i n d i c a t i n g a tremendous increase i n the post- t e s t scores over the pre-t e s t scores. Independent t - t e s t s were c a l c u l a t e d on the treatment-control p o s t - t e s t mean differences obtained from each short course t o p i c . These re s u l t e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher treatment means f o r two of the t o p i c s , higher, n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t treatment values f o r a fu r t h e r two, and lower, n o n - s i g n i f i c a n t treatment means f o r the two remaining t o p i c s . The r e s u l t of a t - t e s t c a l c u l a t e d on the o v e r a l l treatment-control p o s t - t e s t means produced a r e s u l t which i n d i c a t e d that those i n d i v i d u a l s who completed a p r e - t e s t scored s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher on the post- t e s t beyond the .0005 l e v e l . I t i s apparent that pre-course knowledge was s i m i l a r among a l l the groups but that a s i g n i f i c a n t increase occurred between the pre-t e s t and post- t e s t r e s u l t s . The treatment i n d i v i d u a l s achieved a higher pos t - t e s t mean score than d i d the c o n t r o l . 72 A multiple regression calculated with the post-test as the de-pendent variable and a l l the other continuous, interval variables as independent revealed that both the pre-test and educational level were significant contributors to the overall post-test variance at the .05 level. Increasing the significance level to .05 failed to separate these two variables. However, i t was found that the pre-test correlated much more strongly with the post-test than did educational level. These correlation coefficients were 0.54 and 0.36, respectively. The f i r s t hypothesis tested was that a relationship existed between certain socio-economic variables and the post-test. This was rejected for a l l variables except educational level. The second hypo-thesis, that pre-testing the participants prior to participating in the short course improved post-test scores was overwhelmingly accepted. The third hypothesis, that intensity of handbook u t i l i z a t i o n influenced post-test scores, was accepted in the cases where the participants did not complete a pre-test and rejected i n the other cases. Conclusions The main purpose of this study was to determine whether or not the pre-test most significantly influenced the post-test scores. It must be concluded that the pre-test had the most significant effect upon the post-test score, although this result was confounded by the educational level variable which also correlated significantly with the post-test score. It is strongly recommended that in any future study of this nature adequate steps are taken to ensure that the pre-test and 73 educational level variables are decisively separated. Possibly this could be done by modifying the design to one which would lend i t s e l f to an analysis of covariance which would control for educational level. Unfortunately, the design u t i l i z e d here does not permit such an analysis. To remove the possi b i l i t y of conflicting hypotheses, other socio-economic variables were also considered i n the study. These a l l proved to be t r i v i a l , having no effect upon the post-test score. This leaves us with the conclusion that i t was, i n fact, the pre-test which most significantly influenced the post-test scores. The u t i l i z a t i o n of the pre-course handbook material results also proved important. It was found that the post-test scores of those participants who did not complete the pre-test (the control group) were improved by increased u t i l i z a t i o n of the handbooks while this variable did not alter the post-test scores among those who completed the pre-test (the treatment group). From this fact i t i s apparent that adminis-tration of the pre-test i s as effective i n increasing the post-test scores as is the dissemination of handbooks. The pre-test probably caused a crystallization of thought on the part of the participants and prepared them for the educational activity which was before them. There i s l i t t l e chance that the pre-test could have caused this increase in post-test scores by a simple memorization of items since the post-test items were contained in the much larger BCDA pesticide certification examination which was administered over 24 hours later. This potential r i v a l hypothesis could be eliminated in future studies by either lengthening the period of time between the pre-test and post-test or by the use of pa r a l l e l forms of the test, or a combination of these. 74 Recommendation From this study i t appears that pre-testing participants prior to a short adult education activity significantly increases their reten-tion of the course material and i s recommended as an effective instruc-tional device for similar short courses. An adequate period of time should be set aside at the beginning of the activity to allow a l l par-ticipants to complete the pre-test. Bear in mind that completion times w i l l vary with the participants' physiological capabilities. No effort should be spared in easing the mind of the participants by reminding them that the pre-test i s not an evaluative device, but an instructional device. The pre-test was a better means of increasing participant post-test performance than were the handbooks. Elimination of the handbooks and adoption of the pre-test i s favoured i n instances where adequate time i s available at the outset of the courses. Elimination of the handbooks would also save the expense of preparation and mailing. Improvement in the quality of instruction is also of consideration. Particular care should be given to the preparation, development, and presentation of instructional objectives for both the individual presen-tations and the overall course to improve the continuity of topics dis-cussed and provide the participants with a means of self-evaluation. Increased participant attention would be achieved i f the sessions were held in conditions where lighting, acoustics, and diminution of dis-tracting noise and activity could be improved. A wider variety of devices and techniques, beyond films and lectures with limited question and 75 answer periods are strongly recommended to increase learner attention and participation and instructor-learner interactions. For further studies of this type i t is recommended that a means be employed in the design and the research instruments to permit the separation of pre-testing and educational level effects upon the post-test scores. To provide a classic pre-test/post-test control group design i t would be imperative to randomly assign participants into treat-ment and control conditions within each session, although the analysis of socio-economic variables diminished the effect of r i v a l hypotheses in this study. BIBLIOGRAPHY 76 LITERATURE CITED Axling, H. L. Evaluation of County Extension Programs By County Agents  i n Washington State. Pullman: Washington State U n i v e r s i t y , 1959. Banta, C. 0. "Sources of Data for Program Evaluation," Adult Education, V, 4 (1955), 227-230. Blaney, J . P., and D. McKie. "Knowledge of Conference Objectives and E f f e c t Upon Learning," Adult Education Journal, XIX, 2 (1969), 98-105. Boone, E. J . , and J . Duncan. "Needed Research i n Extension Administra-t i v e Organization," Adult Education, XII, 2 (1963), 86-101. B r i t i s h Columbia, Pharmacy Act, Order i n Council Regulation No. 115 (1969). Brunner, Edmond DeS. (ed.). An Overview of Adult Education Research. Washington: Adult Education Ass o c i a t i o n of the U.S.A., 1959. . "Adult Education and Its Research Needs," Adult Education, X, 4 (1960), 218-227. Campbell, Donald T., and J u l i a n C. Stanley. Experimental and Quasi- Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1970. Canter, Ralph R., J r . "The Use of Extended Control-Group Designs i n Human Relations Studies," Psychology B u l l e t i n , 48, 4 (1951), 340-347. Essert, Paul. Creative Leadership i n Adult Education. New York: Pren-t i c e H a l l , 1951. Hovland, C a r l , A. A. Lumsdaine, and F. D. S c h e f f i e l d . Experiments On  Mass Communication. Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1949. Husek, T. R., and K. S i r o t n i k . Item Sampling i n Education Research. Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1967. Hyman, H. H., C. R. Wright, and T. K. Hopkins. Applications of Methods  of Evaluation. Berkeley and Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1962. Jensen, Gale, A. A. L i v e r i g h t , and Walter Hallenbach (eds.). Adult Education: Outlines of an Emerging F i e l d of Study. Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1964. 77 78 Johnston, Mescal and Ward Porter. An Evaluation of the Marketing Project  for Consumers in the Metropolitan Area of L i t t l e Rock. Arkansas Agricultural Extension Service Miscellaneous Publication No. 88, 1965. Kersey, Harry A., Jr. "An Adult Education Program for Seminole Indians in Florida," Adult Leadership, 19, 9 (19 71), 281-282, 310. Lana, Robert E. "Pretest Treatment Interaction Effects in Attitudinal Studies," Psychology Bulletin, 56, 4 (1959), 293-300. Li t c h f i e l d , Ann, L. A. Marx, and A. Stejskal. "Evaluation of the 1966 Adult Education Association National Conference Program," Adult  Leadership, 15, 8 (1967), 287-300. Long, Huey B. "A Summary Report: Adult Education Participation in Brevard County, Florida," Adult Education Journal, XIX, 1 (1967), 34-42. McNair, Robert E. " F u l f i l l i n g Our Mission," Adult Leadership, 19, 6 (1970), 183-185. Schwartz, Shephard, and Berton Winograd. "Preparation of Soldiers for Atomic Maneuvers," Journal of Social Issues, X, 3 (1954), 42-52. Shearon, Ronald W. "Evaluating Adult Basic Education Programs," Adult  Leadership, 19, 1 (1970), 15-24. Solomon, R. L. "An Extension of the Control Group Design," Psychology  Bulletin, 46, 2 (1949), 137-150. Sutton, E. W. Analysis of Research on Selected Aspects of Evaluation  in Adult Education. Tallahasee: Florida State University, 1967. Terman, L. T., and M. A. M e r r i l l . Measuring Intelligence. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1937. Ve rner, Coolie, and Alan Booth. Adult Education. New York: The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1964. Winer, B. J. S t a t i s t i c a l Principles in Experimental Design. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1962. RELATED LITERATURE Downie, N. M., and R. W. Heath. Basic S t a t i s t i c a l Methods. New York and London: Harper and Row, 1965. Educational Testing Service. Pretest and Posttest Results f o r the 1964  N.D.E.A. Summer Foreign Language I n s t i t u t e . MLA Foreign Language  P r o f i c i e n c y Tests for Teachers and Advanced Students. Working Paper, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N. J . , 1962. Gasmin, 0. A. "An Evaluation of the Farm Short Courses at the U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin," Unpublished Doctoral d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Wisconsin, 1966. Glass, Gene V., and J u l i a n C. Stanley. S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n Education  and Psychology. New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , Inc., 1970. M i l l e r , H. L. Teaching and Learning i n Adult Education. New York: The MacMillan Co., 1964. Palmer, R. E., and Coolie Verner. "A Comparison of Three I n s t r u c t i o n a l Techniques," Adult Education, IX, 4 (1959), 232-238. Sjogren, D. P., A. B. Knox and A. Grotelueschen. "Adult Learning i n Relation to P r i o r Adult Education P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " Adult Education, XIX, 1 (1968), 3-10. 79 APPENDIX 1 - PRE-TEST INSTRUMENTS APPENDIX l a - PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX lb - PESTICIDE APPLICATORS CERTIFICATE PRE-EXAMINATION 81 APPENDIX l a PERSONAL DATA QUESTIONNAIRE Please answer a l l questions as c a r e f u l l y as p o s s i b l e . The information that you give on t h i s questionnaire w i l l not influence your score on the p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r ' s examination. A l l of t h i s information w i l l be used for the purpose of improving the short courses that the B.C. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e conducts. We are t r y i n g to make them more h e l p f u l and u s e f u l to you, so that you may get more out of them, and, as a r e s u l t , w i l l f i n d the c e r t i f i c a t i o n examinations e a s i e r . 1. Date 2. What i s your age? 3. What i s your sex? Male Female 4. How many years of schooling d i d you complete? In what country was t h i s ? 5. Have you received any previous i n s t r u c t i o n on p e s t i c i d e s and t h e i r proper use, other than these B.C. government-sponsored short-courses? Yes No 6. Do you presently hold a p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r ' s c e r t i f i c a t e ? No Yes i f yes, which c e r t i f i c a t e s ? 7. Have you attended any previous B.C. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e short courses? No Yes , i f yes, when was that? What were the topics? Have you received the handbooks that apply to t h i s course, that are d i s t r i b u t e d by the B.C. Department of A g r i c u l t u r e ? No Yes , i f yes, where di d you get them? They're mine I borrowed them How thoroughly d i d you read them? (Check one) a) I didn't read them b) I glanced over them once _c) I read them once d) I read them more than once 9. Are you self-employed , or are you (Check one) employed by someone else? 10. How long have you worked with p e s t i c i d e s ? Years. 11. Are you a f u l l - t i m e or part-time p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r ? F u l l - t i m e Part-time (Check one) 12. Approximately what percent of your income came from the a p p l i c a t i o n of p e s t i c i d e s during 1971? percent. 13. Were you born i n Canada? Yes No , i f no, where were you born?_ 14. How long have you l i v e d i n Canada? years. APPENDIX lb PESTICIDE APPLICATORS CERTIFICATE PRE-EXAMINATION Di r e c t i o n s : Please answer the following questions as c a r e f u l l y as po s s i b l e without the use of reference materials. Check the correct answer or answers, f i l l i n the blanks, or match the correct terms. The purpose of t h i s test i s to a i d us i n improving these courses. Do you plan to write the p e s t i c i d e a p p l i c a t o r ' s examination at the end of t h i s course? Yes No Place a check mark beside the following groups of compounds that are c l a s s i f i e d as p e s t i c i d e s . (a) fungicides (b) f e r t i l i z e r s (c) i n s e c t i c i d e s (d) deoderants (e) lime (f) m i t i c i d e s (g) nematocides (h) peatmoss (i) e m u l s i f i e r s (j) rodenticides Match the t o x i c i t i e s with the L.D.^ values. (a) s l i g h t l y t o x i c (b) h i g h l y t o x i c (c) moderately t o x i c 1. L-D of 20 mg./kg. 2. L.D.^ of 200 mg./kg. 3. L.D.5Q of 2000 mg./kg. The use of a number of p e s t i c i d e s i s r e s t r i c t e d i n B.C. Place a check mark beside those of the following materials which require a s p e c i a l permit before they can be purchased and used. (a) A l d r i n (b) (c) (d) D i e l d r i n 2,4-D 2,4,5-T (e) DDT (f) Heptachlor (g) Mercury (h) Paraquat (i) Arsenic (j) Metaldehyde Match the phrases on the right with the correct term on the l e f t . The f i r s t blank i s f i l l e d in as an example. 4 (a) 1 f l u i d ounce (b) pesticide (c) insecticide (d) fungicide (e) herbicide 1. causal organisms of plant diseases. 2. a pesticide used to control diseases of plants. 3. adults with body divided into head, thorax, and abdomen, 3 pairs of legs. 4. two tablespoons. 5. a pesticide used to control weeds. 6. a substance or a mixture, pre-venting, destroying, or repelling any undesirable plant or animal species. 7. a pesticide used to control snails and slugs. 8. a pesticide used to control insects. 9. a herbicide which i s toxic to some plant species and not to others. L i s t the three routes by which pesticides can enter the human body. 84 APPENDIX 2 VARIABLE MEANS, SAMPLE SIZES, AND RESULTS OF T-TESTS BY TREATMENT CONDITION Vari a b l e Treatment Control Mean Standard Deviation Sample Size Mean Standard Deviation Sample Size t - t e s t Age 32.5 12.0 135 37.6 13.0 189 3 .6; p< .01 Years i n Canada 26.2 13.1 135 32.8 13.9 187 4 .3; p< .01 Educational Level 11.9 2.4 134 11.2 2.4 188 2 .6; p< .01 Percent of Wages from P e s t i c i d e A p p l i c a t i o n 15.2 30.8 99 11.9 28.1 158 .72; N. S. Years of Experience 5.2 6.9 117 4.9 8.4 166 .32; N. S. Previous B.C.D.A. Courses 0.2 0.5 135 0.2 0.4 189 0 .0 Previous Non-B.C.D.A. Courses 0.3 0.4 135 0.2 0.4 189 2 .2; p< .05 C e r t i f i c a t e s Held 0.4 0.9 135 0.3 0.7 189 1 .1; N.S . Handbook Use 2.9 1.6 135 3.3 1.6 189 2 .2; p< .05 Pre-test 22.8 4.0 135 Post-test 26.8 2.8 135 25.1 3.6 189 4 .6; p< .05 C e r t i f i c a t i o n Examination Percentage 83.4 9.1 135 81.4 11.3 189 1 .71; p< .05 S t a t i s t i c Used: t = X l ~ X2  / ( n ] L- 1)S^ + ( n 2 - l)S22 fl + 1 \ y n x + n 2 - 2 ["I n 2 y df = n,+ n„- 2 o ••a w PC W O z w > fD O i-l fD CD X (0 O fD o Du OQ It co fD Po H T) 0 O H c (D rt rt 1 i-t O fD > rt 1 o H* 1 rt CO CD H cr H- W to rti rt ft) H- o o Ml n rt r> n> CO H- rt (D o o H- a H-fu CO rt 3 ?v c o Q rt rt CO O O H (0 0 H- n r-h (D CO rt o 01 O to CO ID fD o h-1 0 na s: p> CD CO CO ur f W OQ a CO ro X to fD fD (U H 1 CO (D 9 O-O M O ^ J O J J ^ O t - ' O O O J O V O W I - ' r - ' l - ' O O U i v O O O t O U ) I I I I I L O L O r - ' t O t - ' M O O O r - ' O J > O N | O U i v O » v l 4 > U i | O l - > f - ' O M O t O t O O t O ' C O O t O » J U > v O v O O V O G O v O 0 0 ~ J | - ' t O 4 > ^ J U i 4 > O O t O O U > t O r - ' 0 cx> oo <y> oo u> ui O S O O to O O r-> O ^ l O M H U> S) I—' O I—1 IO i> O IO ~J LO 4> I—' I—1 tO M O VO M M 00 O O O O U i 00 VO J> Ul o 4> J> ^4 O Age Educational Level Non-BCDA Courses Certificates Held BCDA Courses Handbook Use Experience Percent of Wages Years in Canada Pre-test Post-test Certification Exam o o £ «5 M PI O Z Z O H U> pa M 86 APPENDIX 4 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST SCORES OF THE 3 LANDSCAPE TREATMENT COURSES Pre-test Scores Source of(Variance df ss ms F Group 2 10.25 5.12 0.42 not sig. Error 44 542.99 12.34 Total 46 553.24 Post-test Scores df ss ms F Group 2 10.59 5.30 0.95 not sig. Error 44 245.62 5.58 Total 46 256.21 APPENDIX 5 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF POST-TEST SCORES OF THE 3 CONTROL COURSES OF THE NON-AGRICULTURAL AND NON-FORESTRY VEGETATION CONTROL TOPIC Source of Variance df ss ms F Treatment 2 6.87 3.43 0.26 not s i g , Error 54 707.69 13.11 T o t a l 56 714.56 APPENDIX 6 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF PRE-TEST SCORES OF THE 6 TREATMENT GROUPS Source of Variance df ss ms F Group 5 150.52 30.10 1.92 not s Error 129 2024.55 15.69 T o t a l 134 2175.08 

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.831.1-0101495/manifest

Comment

Related Items