UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Occupation and adult education of non-farm residents in rural British Columbia Rusnell, Albert Dale 1970

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1970_A8 R88_2.pdf [ 5.55MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0103930.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0103930-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0103930-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0103930-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0103930-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0103930-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0103930-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0103930-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0103930.ris

Full Text

i OCCUPATION AND ADULT EDUCATION OF NON-FARM RESIDENTS IN RURAL BRITISH COLUMBIA by ALBERT DALE RUSNELL B.A., University of Alberta, 1964 B.Ed., University of Alberta, 1966 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Faculty of Education (Adult Education) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA JULY, 1970 i i I n 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 t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r a n a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l m a k e 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 a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e 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 p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e H e a d o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f 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 n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t o f Adult Education T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a V a n c o u v e r 8, C a n a d a D a t e July 27. 1970 i i i ABSTRACT Because of i n c r e a s i n g t e c h n o l o g i c a l change.in work s i t u a t i o n s , a d u l t education has begun to focus more., upon the r o l e " o f occupations i n urbanized s o c i e t i e s . The purpose of t h i s - study was to assess the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adu l t education and measures of occu p a t i o n a l s t a t u s , category, m o b i l i t y , and job satisfaction-among--non-farm r e s i d e n t s of two r u r a l areas i n B r i t i s h Columbia. West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West, representing areas of low and high socio-economic standing, were - s e l e c t e d f o r a n a l y s i s from f i f t e e n areas surveyed.by the ARDA Canada Land Inventory Socio-Economic P r o j e c t i n B r i t i s h Columbia. I n t e r v i e w schedules completed i n 1967 surveys of those areas were used as the source.of data. Excluded were • schedules f o r farmers, r e t i r e d , and unemployed persons.' The West Kootenay sample c o n s i s t e d of 104 respondents, twenty of whom were p a r t i c i p a n t s - i n a d u l t education, while Vanderhoof West was represented by 130 respondents, i n c l u d i n g twenty-four p a r t i c i p a n t s . O p portunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education appeared to be equal between the. two areas, although the areas d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y w ith respect to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of courses among f u n c t i o n s of adult education. P a r t i c i p a n t s . d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from non-. p a r t i c i p a n t s as they had higher o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s than n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s i n both survey areas. West Kootenay p a r t i c i p a n t s e x h i b i t e d upward s e q u e n t i a l • j o b m o b i l i t y to a s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r extent than d i d West Kootenay n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s . A general t r e n d f o r p a r t i c i p a n t s to have gre a t e r upward o c c u p a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y than n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s , was evident, although the d i f f e r e n c e s were not always s i g n i f i c a n t . When p a r t i c i p a n t s i n both areas were compared, no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were found w i t h respect to any of the four o c c u p a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s . i v The re s u l t s of the study suggest that p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education by non-farm, residents of r u r a l B r i t i s h -Columbia i s not strongly associated' with occupational . , measures. V TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER • • ' •  . ' PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . , 1 Purpose 2 Hypotheses 2 Procedure ' 2 The Samples . . 3 Dependent Variables 3 Data Analysis 4 Definitions and Limitations 5 D e f i n i t i o n of Terms 5 Limitations 7 Plan of the Study 7 Footnotes - 8 I I . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 9 Rural-Urban Differences 9 Descriptive Variables ' 11 Occupational Status 12 Occupational Category 13 Job S a t i s f a c t i o n . . . 14 Occupational M o b i l i t y t. . . . . . . 14 Footnotes 16 I I I . THE AREAS STUDIED 19 Physical Description and Settlement Patterns . 19 The People 20 Opportunities f o r Adult Education 24 Night School Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Distance' to Schools . . . 26 Migration Into Survey Areas 28 Footnotes 30 v i CHAPTER PAGE IV. OCCUPATIONAL VARIABLES AND ADULT EDUCATION . . . 3 1 Occupational Status 3 1 Occupational Category 3 3 Job S a t i s f a c t i o n 3 4 Occupational M o b i l i t y . . . . 4 0 Sequential Job M o b i l i t y . . 4 0 I n t e r g e n e r a t i o n M o b i l i t y 4 2 M o b i l i t y ' Score 4 4 Footnotes 5 0 V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . 51 • Summary . . . . . . . . . 5 1 The Areas Studied 5 1 P a r t i c i p a n t s and Non-Participants . . . . . 5 3 West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West P a r t i c i p a n t s 5 4 Conclusions . . . . . . . . 5 4 BIBLIOGRAPHY . .' 5 6 APPENDIX'A- . . . 6 1 APPENDIX B \63 APPENDIX C 6 6 APPENDIX D . . . . . . 7 1 APPENDIX E . . . . . . . . 8 0 v i i LIST OF TABLES TABLE - . PAGE I. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof - West Samples By Industry of Occupation . . . . 22 - I I . Chi Square and Z Values for West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Sample Differences On Selected Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . 23 I I I . Night School Courses Offered i n West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West . . 25 IV. Summary D i s t r i b u t i o n of Number of Night School Courses Offered i n West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West From May 1, 1964 to May 1, 1967 26 V. Distances Travelled to Elementary and Secondary Schools • 27 VI. Distribution' of'West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants and Non-Participants By Length of Time i n Area . 2 9 VII. S t a t i s t i c s f or Occupational Status . . . . . . . . 32 VIII. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof • West Samples By Grouped Occupational Category . 34 IX. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants and Non-Participants By Occupational iCategory . 35 X. S t a t i s t i c s f o r Job'Satisfaction 36 XI. Chi Square Values and T Ratio P r o b a b i l i t y Levels f o r Comparisons By Positions o f Agreement on Job S a t i s f a c t i o n Statements . . . 38 XII. Response D i s t r i b u t i o n of Participants and Non-Participants i n West Kootenay f o r the Job S a t i s f a c t i o n Statement "I Enjoy My Work More Than My Leisure Time" 39 v i i i TABLE PAGE XIII. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants and Non-Participants By Direction of Sequential Job Mobility 41 XIV. S t a t i s t i c s f o r Sequential Job Mobil i t y 43 XV. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof - West Participants and Non-Participants By Direction of Intergeneration Mob i l i t y . . . ... 45 XVI. S t a t i s t i c s for Intergeneration Mobility . . . •'. . . 4 6 XVII. D i s t r i b u t i o n of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants and Non-Participants By Direction of.Mobility Score 48 XVIII. S t a t i s t i c s f o r Mobil i t y Score 49 DEDICATION my wife Linda X ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Sincere thanks are extended to Dr. Coolie Verner for his help and guidance throughout t h i s study, and to Dr. Seong Soo Lee and Mr. James Thornton f o r t h e i r assistance as members of the committee. Also very much appreciated was the continuing -guidance of Dr. Gary Dickinson, and the assistance of Mr. Al Cartier, Community Programs Branch, Department of Education, i n obtaining government records. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Urbanization has become an increasingly dominant phenomenon of modern i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t i e s , accompanied by an emphasis on large, integrated s o c i a l systems composed of i s o l a t e d but i n t e r r e l a t e d functions that necessitate adaptive changes at i n d i v i d u a l and group l e v e l s . At the i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l , urban society's complex technological environment has altered the i n d i v i d u a l ' s role i n the community and maintains constant pressure on him to increase his productive value i n the work world. As a re s u l t there i s often l i t t l e personal energy or i n c l i n a t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t e a c t i v e l y i n community a f f a i r s . At the same time, i n s t i t u t i o n s and organizations attempt to provide opportunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n group l i f e to counteract the i s o l a t i o n created by urbanization. Campaigns are waged to encourage p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n an e f f o r t to overcome the b a r r i e r s existing i n a technological environment, but these generally •achieve only i n d i f f e r e n t suecess7 In company with other s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , adult education attempts to increase the p a r t i c i p a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l s . Consequently, the analysis of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s of v i t a l i n t e r e s t . Such analysis provides a measure of success or f a i l u r e i n reaching target''populations, indicates the need fo r changes i n the design and conduct of educational program's to meet the needs of particular^ populations, and provides guidance to meet the educational^ needs of new and d i f f e r e n t groups of people i n the future.\There appears to be a r e l a t i o n s h i p between successful educational programs for adults and knowledge of the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p a r t i c i p a n t s . Therefore, such c l i e n t e l e analysis has been an increasingly useful trend i n research. 2 PURPOSE The purpose of t h i s study was to assess the rela t i o n s h i p between each of four occupational variables and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education within and between areas of low and high socio-economic status i n r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia. HYPOTHESES Two n u l l hypotheses were tested: ( 1 ) There are no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences between participants and non-participants i n adult education with respect to occupational status, category, mobility, or job s a t i s f a c t i o n . ( 2 ) There are no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t differences between participants i n adult education resident i n areas of low and high socio-economic status with respect to occupational status, category, mobility, or job s a t i s f a c t i o n . PROCEDURE Data f o r the study were derived from interview schedules obtained i n the ARDA Canada Land Inventory Project #49009,"'" which was a socio-economic survey of 2 several r u r a l areas of B r i t i s h Columbia. On the basis of ov e r a l l socio-economic standing and s i m i l a r i t y of sample size, two survey areas were selected f o r analysis: West Kootenay with r e l a t i v e l y low, and Vanderhoof West with r e l a t i v e l y high status. Those two areas were chosen from among f i f t e e n ARDA.survey areas ranked according to r e l a t i v e socio-economic standing by Dickinson and Davison because of the p o t e n t i a l association of socio-economic status with community attitudes of acceptance or r e j e c t i o n toward 3 continuing education. 3 The Samples Interviews with r u r a l household heads i n both areas were completed i n May of 1967. Sampling and interviewing procedures f o r the ARDA project including the selected areas f o r the present study have been detailed elsewhere.^ A random sample of r u r a l l o t s was selected and interviews were sought with a l l household heads residing on the chosen l o t s . The West Kootenay survey consisted of a 12.5 per cent (215 l o t s ) sample of 1722 l o t s , from which 143 interviews 5 with household heads were completed. As the present study was concerned with occupational variables of non-farm residents, nine farmers, twenty r e t i r e d , and ten unemployed persons reporting no occupation were withdrawn so that the r e s u l t i n g sample consisted of 104 respondents. In Vanderhoof West, a f i f t e e n per cent sample of 2993 l o t s resulted i n 449 l o t s on which 217 household heads were interviewed.^ After s i x t y - s i x farmers, sixteen r e t i r e d , and f i v e unemployed persons were eliminated from the l i s t , 130 respondents constituted the sample fo r t h i s study. Dependent Variables Four occupational factors were included as dependent variables i n the study because of t h e i r p o t e n t i a l association with motivation to p a r t i c i p a t e i n adult education. Occupational status, incorporating concepts of prestige and various other rewards derived from an occupation, appears to be correlated with factors such as income and l e v e l of education which are known to be associated with p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education. Occupational category possibly involves such factors as degree of technological change, opportunities f o r advancement, and expectations of continuing education among d i f f e r e n t industries and work groups. The r e l a t i o n s h i p of job s a t i s f a c t i o n to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education p o t e n t i a l l y t ests the diverse rationales of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education to improve or advance i n a w e l l - l i k e d 4 job or to escape from job d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n by changing jobs. Both elements of occupational mobility p o t e n t i a l l y implicate p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education as a function of i n d i v i d u a l e f f o r t to change status. Sequential job mobility measures change of status over the most recent job change, and intergeneration mobility measures change from the father's occupational status. In a speculative attempt to combine both mobility e f f e c t s , an o v e r a l l mobility score was calculated which had the effect of a r t i f i c i a l l y dispersing scores of i n d i v i d u a l s who had t o t a l l y upward or downward h i s t o r i e s of mobility. Data Analysis The f i r s t stage of the analysis consisted of an assessment of the r e l a t i v e opportunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education within each area using Department of Education records concerning night school classes sponsored 7 by school d i s t r i c t s within the survey areas. Course t i t l e s were c l a s s i f i e d by function according to the categories suggested by Bryson, and d i s t r i b u t i o n s by function were tested f o r s i g n i f i c a n t differences. Distances to elementary and secondary schools were compared as was the amount of recent migration into the areas to determine another facet of the a c c e s s i b i l i t y to courses. The second stage of the analysis consisted of t e s t i n g differences between participants and non-participants within each area with respect to the four occupational variables. Thirdly,, differences between participants from the low and high socio-economic areas were tested with respect to the same four occupational variables. Chi square tests were used to test differences among occupational categories, positions of agreement fo r job s a t i s f a c t i o n statements, d i r e c t i o n of mobility scores, and 5 various c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of samples. When expected frequencies 9 were considered too low, Yates correction was used. Differences among occupational status scores, mobility scores, distances t r a v e l l e d , and job s a t i s f a c t i o n scores were tested by a z approximation from Wilcoxon's Rank-Sum te s t . A correction f o r t i e s was required i n the formula."'"0 When chi square values indicated that the d i s t r i b u t i o n by p o s i t i o n of agreement with job s a t i s f a c t i o n statements d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y between samples, a t r a t i o was-used to test differences between proportions of participants,to t o t a l sample selecting given positions on job s a t i s f a c t i o n statements."""""" The purpose of the t r a t i o was to compare r e l a t i v e positions on d i s t r i b u t i o n s without regard to di s t r i b u t i o n s from which participants were drawn. The significance l e v e l used was .05, and when ., differences were s i g n i f i c a n t at greater than the .05 l e v e l they were reported not s i g n i f i c a n t . DEFINITIONS AND LIMITATIONS D e f i n i t i o n of Terms Survey Area of Low or High Socio-Economic Standing ARDA survey areas ranked either near .the bottom.or near the top of the l i s t of f i f t e e n ARDA survey areas ranked r e l a t i v e to each other with respect to socio-economic 12 standing by Dickinson and Davison. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Adult Education P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education was considered i n very broad terms. S p e c i f i c courses taken by respondents were not ascertained and p a r t i c i p a t i o n opportunities i n each of the survey areas were only roughly estimated. Respondents answering- "Yes" to the Interview Schedule question, "Have you taken any adult education courses i n the l a s t three years?" were defined as participants. 6 Functions of Adult Education Night school courses were categorized 1according to Bryson's statement of f i v e functions of adult.education: (1) remedial (2)- occupational (3) r e l a t i o n a l (4) l i b e r a l (5) p o l i t i c a l . Occupation The broad category of work performed by an i n d i v i d u a l and defined by an occupational t i t l e i n the Occupational  C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual: Census of Canada, 1961."^ Job The p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n held by an i n d i v i d u a l within his occupation. Occupational Status The r e l a t i v e measure of income, education, and prestige associated with an occupation, as indicated f o r an occupation on the I 9 6 I Blishen Index of Occupational Status. Occupational Category The major occupational d i v i s i o n an occupation was c l a s s i f i e d under by the Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual:  Census of Canada, 1961. Job S a t i s f a c t i o n The o v e r a l l i n t e r e s t , enjoyment, and s a t i s f a c t i o n indicated by an i n d i v i d u a l f o r his p r i n c i p a l job by a t o t a l sum of ranks f o r nine statements representing the B r a y f i e l d 17 and Rothe Index of Job S a t i s f a c t i o n . Occupational Mobility Three measures of mobility were used. Sequential job-mobility - the arithmetic difference between occupational status scores assigned to an indi v i d u a l ' s present and f i r s t previous jobs. Intergeneration mobility - the arithmetic difference between occupational status scores assigned to 7 an i n d i v i d u a l ' s present job and his father's job. Mobi l i t y score - the arithmetic sum of the differences from the two previous measures. Limitations Occupational Measures The exact, nature of an ind i v i d u a l ' s work may not have been accurately r e f l e c t e d i n the job t i t l e , and as a re s u l t subsequent occupational measures may have been misleading. .*.'-.• '•' Rural Non-Farm People Respondents were a l l non-farm r u r a l residents, and findings of the study may have no a p p l i c a b i l i t y to groups other than non-farm populations i n the sample areas. PLAN OF THE STUDY The report of the study i s presented i n f i v e chapters. Chapter One includes an introduction with explanations of purposes, procedures, and terms. Chapter Two i s comprised of a review of relevant l i t e r a t u r e . In Chapter Three, a description of the physical nature of the areas studied, a comparison of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of respondents i n the samples, and an analysis of opportunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education i n the areas are provided. Chapter Four i s composed of the main analysis, testing the four' occupational variables with respect to the hypotheses of the study, and Chapter Five provides a summary and conclusions. 8 FOOTNOTES 1. ARDA represents " A g r i c u l t u r a l and Rural Development: Act". 2. C. Verner, Planning.and Conducting a Survey: A Case  Study (Ottawa: Rural Development Branch, Department of Forestry and Rural Development, 1967). .... . . 3. J.G. Dickinson and CV. Davison, "Identifying •:• . . Socio-Economic D i s p a r i t i e s Among Rural Areas" (unpublished research report, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1969). 4. Verner, CJD. c i t . 5. C. Verner and J.G. Dickinson, A Socio-Economic Survey  of the West Kootenay Area i n B r i t i s h Columbia^ Report #6 ARDA Canada Land Inventory Project #49009, (Tancouver, -The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968). 6. C. Verner, J.G. Dickinson, and D.V. Anderson, A Socio-Economic Survey of the Vanderhoof West Area i n  B r i t i s h Columbia, Report #7, ARDA Canada Land Inventory Project #49009, (Vancouver, The University of B r i t i s h / Columbia, I 9 6 8 ) . . 7. West Kootenay School D i s t r i c t s were as follows: #7, Nelson; #8, Slocan; #9, Castlegar; #10, Nakusp; #11, T r a i l ; and #86, Creston. Vanderhoof West School D i s t r i c t s were as follows: #53, Terrace; #54, Smithers; #55, Burns Lake; and #56, Vanderhoof. 8. L. Bryson, Adult Education, (Boston: American Book Company, 1936), pp.29-47. 9 . When greater than 20$ of expected frequencies were less than 5, Yates correction was used. 10. See Appendix B f o r information concerning the Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test. 11. See Appendix B f o r the t r a t i o formulae. 12. Dickinson and Davison, £p_. c i t . 13. Bryson, op. • c i t . , pp.29-47. 14. Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual: Census of Canada, 1961, (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1961). 15. B.R. Blishen, "A Socio-Economic Index for Occupations i n Canada", The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 4: 41-53, 19W. 16. Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual, op. c i t . 17. A.H. B r a y f i e l d and H.F. Rothe, "An Index of Job S a t i s f a c t i o n " , Journal of Applied Psychology, 35: 307-311, 1951. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Relationships between p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education and various occupational variables have been documented i n the l i t e r a t u r e , however, many of the findings may not be applicable to the population studied here. A sample of r u r a l , non-farm, employed household heads was used, therefore the study d i f f e r e d i n setting and sample ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s from many other studies, and because of t h i s the generalizations r e s u l t i n g from these other studies may be i n v a l i d when applied to the present study. RURAL-URBAN DIFFERENCES Although Douglah and Moss found no s i g n i f i c a n t differences i n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . r a t e s between r u r a l and more urban places of residence,"*" and other reports claimed lessening rural-urban differences with increasing evidence 2 of r u r a l urbanization, many large scale studies have reported s i g n i f i c a n t differences between rural-and urban p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education. Johnstone and Rivera determined that twenty-three per cent of t h e i r t o t a l national sample compared to only sixteen per cent of 3 participants resided i n small towns and r u r a l areas. Sim i l a r l y , Participants i n Further Education i n Canada reported that forty-two per cent of the sample compared to only twenty-four per cent of participants l i v e d i n r u r a l areas and population centers under ten thousand. 4 Analyzing the 1957 United States Population Survey, Booth found that non-participants were more l i k e l y to l i v e i n r u r a l areas, where college-educated residents, i n p a r t i c u l a r , 5 exhibited even less p a r t i c i p a t i o n than normally expected. 10 E c o l o g i c a l and demographic f a c t o r s have been c i t e d as r e s p o n s i b l e i n part f o r low r a t e s of r u r a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Brunner s t a t e d t h a t a c c e s s i b i l i t y and p r o x i m i t y to centers f o r a d u l t education increased p a r t i c i p a t i o n , 0 but r u r a l areas, according to G i f f e n , were, l a c k i n g many p u b l i c and 7 e d u c a t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s . Loomis suggests t h a t , "In general, the more r u r a l the area, the more disadvantaged i t w i l l be i n non-vocational adult education f a c i l i t i e s . ", and Verner and Newberry claimed r u r a l non-farm residents, were l e a s t Q adequately served by adult education. Dickinson suggested that the reasons f o r such a s i t u a t i o n i n c l u d e d o r g a n i z a t i o n a l d i f f i c u l t i e s and economic problems of program maintenance i n s p a r s e l y s e t t l e d areas."'"0 T r a v e l l i n g distances to s e r v i c e centers i n r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia were found not s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e l a t e d to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a d u l t education by Goard,"'""'" but i n a study of Pemberton V a l l e y i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Dickinson reported t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n decreased w i t h i n c r e a s i n g distance from night school, and the distance t r a v e l l e d to school s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d between p a r t i c i p a n t s and 12 n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s . Dickinson and Verner, r e p o r t i n g f u r t h e r on Pemberton V a l l e y , s t a t e d t h a t distance to a c t i v i t i e s i n f l u e n c e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n but was not the most important 13 b a r r i e r . y These f i n d i n g s , considering the g r e a t e r distances to s e r v i c e s i n r u r a l areas, provide f u r t h e r p l a u s i b i l i t y f o r lower r u r a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s . Of p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t to the present study were comments by Verner and Newberry that r u r a l communities had fewer c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n s among people, and because of t h i s , p a r t i c i p a t i o n was not l i m i t e d t o p a r t i c u l a r segments of the population."'" 4 Further, these authors claimed that r u r a l people were l e s s c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by occupation than urban r e s i d e n t s , causing l e s s i n f l u e n c e on p a r t i c i p a t i o n 15 to a r i s e from occupation. 11 DESCRIPTIVE VARIABLES The extent of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education was related to such descriptive factors as income, occupation, education, socio-economic status, and age i n numerous reports."'" Almost without exception, p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s p o s i t i v e l y associated with higher"income, occupations of higher status, higher l e v e l s of formal education, and combinations of these factors contributing toward higher 17 socio-economic status. Formal education was considered to be the most important indicator of p a r t i c i p a t i o n by several researchers, including Douglah and Moss,"'"8 Brunner,"'"9 20 and London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom. Knox and Videbeck considered status configurations combining several descriptive variables more important than i s o l a t e d variables r e l a t i n g 21 to p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Exceptions to some of the previous generalizations were noted, however. In Pemberton :Valley, Dickinson found occupation, education, and income not s i g n i f i c a n t l y related to adult education p a r t i c i p a t i o n of 22 r u r a l non-farm household heads, and London and Carey noted that the highest socio-economic statuses were not 23 active i n adult education. Age, when related to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education, generally shows a st e a d i l y r i s i n g curve to middle age, followed by a drop i n l a t e r years. Participants i n Further Education i n Canada tabulated f i f t y - s i x per cent of participants between age twenty-five and forty-four and only 15 . 3 per cent over age f o r t y - f i v e . Brunner stated that the largest group of participants were i n the age 25 range t h i r t y to forty-four, and Verner and Booth noted that age was not a b a r r i e r to p a r t i c i p a t i o n but p a r t i c i p a t i o n was high from the early t h i r t i e s to early fifties. 2° 12 OCCUPATIONAL STATUS A degree o f c o n f u s i o n e x i s t s i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e between c a t e g o r i z a t i o n o f o c c u p a t i o n s i n t o l a r g e groups i n d i c a t i n g s t a t u s and more r e f i n e d groups i n d i c a t i n g c a t e g o r y o f o c c u p a t i o n . F o r t h e purposes o f t h e p r e s e n t r e v i e w , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a d u l t e d u c a t i o n t o o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s was l i m i t e d t o comparisons o f - w h i t e and b l u e c o l l a r w o r k ers on t h e assu m p t i o n t h a t w h i t e c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n s a r e g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d t o be more p r e s t i g e o u s . Almost a l l such comparisons i n d i c a t e , t h a t w h i t e c o l l a r p a r t i c i p a t e more t h a n b l u e c o l l a r w o r k e r s . Johnstone and R i v e r a c a l c u l a t e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s o f t h i r t y - t w o p e r cent f o r w h i t e c o l l a r , and se v e n t e e n p e r cent f o r b l u e c o l l a r 27 r e s p o n d e n t s . When c o n t r o l l e d f o r e d u c a t i o n and income, w h i t e c o l l a r workers c o n t i n u e d t o e x h i b i t h i g h e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s t h a n b l u e c o l l a r w o r k ers a t e v e r y e d u c a t i o n a l and 28 income l e v e l . London, Wenkert,. and Hagstrom, i n an urban s e t t i n g f o u n d p a r t i c i p a t i o n r a t e s o f n i n e t e e n p e r cent f o r upper w h i t e c o l l a r , f o u r t e e n p e r cent f o r lo w e r w h i t e c o l l a r , e l e v e n p e r cent f o r upper b l u e c o l l a r , and n i n e p e r cent f o r 29 l o w e r b l u e c o l l a r employees. Working i n a n o t h e r urban s e t t i n g , K a p l a n wrote,. " I t may be c o n c l u d e d t h a t by and l a r g e t h o s e p e r s o n s who were engaged i n o c c u p a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g more f o r m a l o r academic t r a i n i n g and e d u c a t i o n , . t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l and w h i t e c o l l a r o c c u p a t i o n s , p a r t i c i p a t e d i n e d u c a t i o n a l and c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s t o a g r e a t e r degree t h a n t h o s e engaged i n o c c u p a t i o n s r e q u i r i n g l e s s t r a i n i n g o f t h i s k i n d . " 3 0 P a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t t o t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y was t h e r e p o r t o f Goard and D i c k i n s o n , who compared a matched sample o f r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia h o u s e h o l d head p a r t i c i p a n t s . a n d n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s on measures o f 1958 B l i s h e n S c a l e 31 32 o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s r a t i n g s . ' They found a s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r o c c u p a t i o n a l s t a t u s l e v e l among p a r t i c i p a n t s t h a n n o n - p a r t i c i p a n t s . 13 OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY A large number of reports r e l a t i n g occupation to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education c l a s s i f i e d participants into broad occupational d i v i s i o n s . No generally accepted categorization scheme was evident, and the number and inclusiveness of categories varied widely. A majority of the studies considered only participants i n selected courses or agencies and did not deal with non-participants. Only area surveys were considered relevant to the present review.. Participants i n Further Education i n Canada reported managerial and professional, and c l e r i c a l categories greatly overrepresented among participants, i n proportion to t h e i r 3 3 numbers i n the labor force. London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom calculated p a r t i c i p a t i o n rates of twenty-two per cent for professions, sixteen per cent f o r managers, middle service, and c l e r i c a l and sales categories, twelve per cent f o r s k i l l e d workers, but only s i x per cent f o r foremen and .five per cent f o r laborers. Johnstone and Rivera discovered professionals comprised twenty-three per cent of participants but only twelve per cent of the t o t a l sample, while operatives were ten per cent of participants but seventeen per cent of the sample, and laborers were two per cent of participants 3 5 but. f i v e per cent of the sample. In a sample of t h i r t y - f i v e thousand from the United States Census, Holden found twenty-f i v e per cent of participants were from professional and tech n i c a l categories,.which made up only nine per cent of the t o t a l sample; eleven per cent were operatives, a category comprising twenty per cent of the sample; and four per cent were laborers, a group making up ten per cent of the t o t a l sample. 3 0 Booth calculated r a t i o s of participants to non-participants from 1957 United ;States.Census data, and reported professional and tec h n i c a l workers most active, with 14 a r a t i o of .301. Managers, o f f i c i a l s , and proprietors were second, with a r a t i o of .116, and service workers, operatives, ' '. , 37 and laborers were least active with very low r a t i o s . The four surveys cited indicate general agreement that professional, technical, and managerial groups are, most active i n adult education, and operatives and laborers are least active. JOB SATISFACTION : Very l i t t l e research was evident concerning the r e l a t i o n s h i p between job s a t i s f a c t i o n and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education, although numerous, studies related job s a t i s f a c t i o n to various occupational variables. Studies by Johnstone and Rivera and by London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom both suggested p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education was more 38 evident among more d i s s a t i s f i e d workers. However, i n r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia, Goard and Dickinson i n separate studies both found no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between participants and non-participants i n Brayfield-Rothe -• 39 measures of job s a t i s f a c t i o n . Similar findings were reported by Douglah and Moss, who stated that occupational adjustment i n terms of job s a t i s f a c t i o n had no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p to p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education.^ 0 OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY Occupational mobility was noted, to be d i f f i c u l t to study because of such factors as regression toward the mean on intergeneration mobility and d i f f e r e n t i a l factors operating at d i f f e r e n t originating status l e v e l s . ^ 1 Evidence f o r s o c i a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n general indicated a large degree of occupational changing between d i f f e r e n t status l e v e l s was normal i n American society, making'mobility measures crude at best. In one study testing four d i f f e r e n t 15 rationales f o r e f f e c t s of mobility, upon p a r t i c i p a t i o n , a conclusion was reached of no effect over the long run. • Only two studies concerning adult-"-education and mobility were found. Johnstone and Rivera reported that young men with high mobility expectations had higher rates of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult" education, 4 4 and London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom concluded, "those aspiring to a s k i l l e d manual job have the highest rate of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , while those aspiring to the l e s s - s k i l l e d occupations ( c l e r i c a l and sales, A-5 semi- and u n s k i l l e d manual) have markedly low rates." In evaluating these studies, i t was concluded that desired, expected, and actual mobility were d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t phenomena. 16 FOOTNOTES 1. M. Douglah and G. Moss, " D i f f e r e n t i a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n Patterns of Adults of Low and High Educational Attainments" Adult Education 18: 247-259, 1968, p. 253.. 2. C. Verner and J. Newberry, "The Nature of Adult . P a r t i c i p a t i o n " Adult Education; 8: 202-222, 1968, p.211; J. London and J.T. Carey, "Adult Education and Society" Review of Educational Research' 2 9 : 237-245, 1959, p.237. 3-. J.W. C. Johnstone and R.J. Rivera, Volunteers f o r  Learning (Chicago: Aldine Publishing, 1965) p.77.-4. Participants i n Further Education i n Canada (Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1963), p.15. • 5. A. Booth, "A Demographic Consideration of Non-P a r t i c i p a t i o n " Adult Education 11: 223-229, 1961, p.224. 6. E. deS. Brunner, et . a l . , An Overview of Adult-Education Research (Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1959), p.97. J. P.J. Giffen, "Adult Education and the Rural Community" Canadian Journal of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science 13: 533-544, 1947, p.535. . " 8 . CP. Loomis "Rural Adult Education-The Overall Picture" Rural S o c i a l Systems and Adult Education, CP. Loomis, et a l . , (The Michigan State College Press, 1953), P«332. ' 9 . Verner and Newberry, OJD. c i t . , p. 219. 10. J.G. Dickinson, "Rural Adult Education" (unpublished research manuscript, Faculty of Education, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1970), p . l . "11. D.S. Goard, "An Analysis of Participants i n Rural Adult Education" (unpublished M.A. thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968), p.42. 12. J.G. Dickinson, ¥An A n a l y t i c a l Survey of the Pemberton Valley i n B r i t i s h Columbia with Special Reference -to Adult Education" (unpublished Ed.D. diss e r t a t i o n , University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968), p.223. •13. J.G. Dickinson.and C. Verner, Community Structure  and P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Adult Education, (Vancouver: Faculty of Education, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1969), p.35. 17 14 . Verner and Newberry, op_. c i t . , p. 211 . 15. I b i d . , p.209. 16 . E.H. M i z r u c h i and L.M. Vanaria, "Who P a r t i c i p a t e s i n >Adult Education?" Adult Education 10: 141-143 , I 9 6 0 ; Verner and Newberry, ojo. c i t . ; Brunner, op_. c i t . ; D.S. Goard and J.G. Dickinson, TTTe Influence of Education and Age on . P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n R u r a l Adult Education, (Vancouver: F a c u l t y of Education, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 6 8 ) . 17 . J . London, " A t t i t u d e s Toward Adult Education by S o c i a l C l a s s " Adult Education 13: 226-233 , 1963; H . . M i l l e r , P a r t i c i p a t i o n of Adults i n Education: A F o r c e - F i e l d A n a l y s i s (Center f o r the Study of L i b e r a l Education f o r A d u l t s , Boston U n i v e r s i t y , 1967).; A.C. Clarke, VThe Use of Leisure- • and i t s R e l a t i o n t o . L e v e l s of Occupational P r e s t i g e " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 21 : 301-307 , 1956; A.B. Knox and R. Videbeck, "Adult Education and Adult L i f e Cycle" Adult Education 13: 102 -121 , 1963 . 18 . Douglah and Moss, ojo. c i t . , p. 256. 19 . Brunner, ojo. c i t . , p . 9 6 . 20 . J . London, R. Wenkert, and W.0. Hagstrom, Adult  Education and S o c i a l Class, (Survey Research Center, U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, 1 963 ) , p.110.,-2 1 . Knox and Videbeck, ojo. c i t . . , p. 107. 22. Dickinson, 1968, ojo. c i t . , p.205. 23 . London 'and Carey, ojo. c i t . , p.241. 24 . P a r t i c i p a n t s i n F u r t h e r Education i n Canada, op. c i t . , p , 1 2 . . 25 . Brunner, ojo. c i t . , p.97. , 1 26 . C. Verner and A. Booth, Adult Education, (Center f o r A p p l i e d Research i n Education, Washington, 1964 ) , p.28. 27- Johnstone, and R i v e r a , ojo. c i t . , p . 9 7 . 28. I b i d . , pp.98-99. 29 . London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom, jojo. c i t . , p.41/ 30 . A.A. Kaplan, Socio-Economic Circumstances and Adult  P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n . C e r t a i n C u l t u r a l and E d u c a t i o n a l A c t i v i t i e s , (Teachers College., Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1943), p. 23 . 18 31. Goard and Dickinson, oj>. c i t . , p. 20. 32. B.-R. B l i s h e n , "The Construction "and Use "of An" Occupational Class Scale", Canadian J o u r n a l of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science- 24: 519-531, 1958. ' [ ~ 33« P a r t i c i p a n t s i n Further Education i n Canada, op_. c i t . , p.12. 34. London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom, O J D . c i t . , p.41. 35. Johnstone and R i v e r a , op. c i t . , p.75. 36. J.B. Holden, "A Survey of P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Adult Education Classes", Adult Leadership 10: 258-260, 1<?5'8, p.259. 37. Booth, £p_. c i t . , p. 225. 38. Johnstone and R i v e r a , O J D . cit;, p.453; London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom, op_. c i t . , p. 113. 39. Goard, ojo. c i t . , P«35; Dickinson, 19 68, ojo. c i t . , p. 205. 40., ' Douglah and Moss, . OJD. c i t . , p. 253. 41 . O.D. Duncan and R.W. Hodge, "Educational and Occupational M o b i l i t y : A Regression Analysis'!, The ...American  J o u r n a l of .Sociology .68: 629-644, 1963., pp.634, 6 4 0 . ~ ~ 4 2 . S.M. L i p s e t and R. Bendix, " S o c i a l M o b i l i t y and. Occupational Career P a t t e r n s " , American J o u r n a l of Sociology 57: 366-373 and 494-504, 1952, p.502. 4 3 . R.F. C u r t i s , "Occupational M o b i l i t y and Membership in'Formal Voluntary A s s o c i a t i o n s : A Note on Research", American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review . 24: 846-848, 1959, p.848. 44. Johnstone and R i v e r a , £p_. c i t . , p. 10. 45. London, Wenkert, and Hagstrom, O J D . c i t . , p .114. CHAPTER I I I THE AREAS STUDIED The ARDA survey areas chosen f o r the study were West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West."*" Although d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t between the areas w i t h respect to topography.,,., geographic s i z e , p o p u l a t i o n s i z e , and economic base, s i m i l a r i t i e s were evident w i t h .respect to settlement patterns and' personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the non-farm respondents sampled. W e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d night school programs operated' w i t h i n each area, but d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t e d among i n d i v i d u a l school d i s t r i c t s w i t h respect to p r o v i s i o n f o r continuing education so that o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adu l t education were unevenly d i s t r i b u t e d w i t h i n and between the two survey areas. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION AND SETTLEMENT PATTERNS • West Kootenay c o n s i s t s of approximately 8300 square mi l e s i n the south-east corner of B r i t i s h Columbia. The topography i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d by narrow v a l l e y s separated by steep mountains, and the t o t a l p o p ulation was some seventy thousand people i n 1967. A m a j o r i t y of the people r e s i d e near f o u r major c i t i e s : T r a i l , Castlegar, Nelson, and. Creston. The area was o r i g i n a l l y developed under a mining economy, and l i t t l e a g r i c u l t u r a l development e x i s t s except near Creston. A p u l p m i l l and sawmill are l o c a t e d i n Castlegar, T r a i l maintains Cominco's l a r g e smelting operation as w e l l as Trans-Canada highway t o u r i s t f a c i l i t i e s , and Nelson i s the major e d u c a t i o n a l , f i n a n c i a l , and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e center. The Vanderhoof West area i s g e o g r a p h i c a l l y much l a r g e r than West Kootenay and g e n e r a l l y l i e s w i t h i n f i f t y 20 miles' on either side of Highway•Sixteen i n central B r i t i s h Columbia. Its western region i s mountainous, and a plateau of r o l l i n g h i l l s composes the eastern section. A population of approximately twenty-five thousand i s concentrated near the main centers of Vanderhoof, Fort St.' James, Burns Lake, Smithers, and Terrace. Farming i s not predominant due to the short growing season and poor s o i l conditions, but forestry i s a major industry. Tourism i s a growing industry throughout the area and Terrace i s a major transportation center. THE PEOPLE The West Kootenay sample consisted of ninety-eight males and s i x females. Of these, ninety-five were married, two were single, and seven were divorced, widowed-, or separated. The mean age of the sample was 44.8 and the mean education was 8 .6 years of school completed with the educational l e v e l ranging from unive r s i t y degree to grade f i v e or l e s s . The mean income of the sample was $5278, with four respondents reporting income over $10,000. Occupations reported by respondents were di s t r i b u t e d among several industries, including forestry, mining, service, 2 transportation, and construction. The Vanderhoof West sample was made up of 129 men and one woman, of whom 120 were married, s i x were single, and four were widowed, divorced, dr separated. The mean age was 41.0 and the mean education was 9.5 years of school completed with the educational l e v e l ranging from unive r s i t y degree to grade f i v e or l e s s . Mean income for the-sample -was $5734, including, four s a l a r i e s above $10,000, two of which were $50,000 and $60,000. As i n West Kootenay, occupations were d i s t r i b u t e d among several industries, but Vanderhoof West d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y from West Kootenay 2 1 . with respect to the d i s t r i b u t i o n of occupations among industries. Table I indicates that the chi square value of 15.84 was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l . The major differences between samples consisted of Vanderhoof West's lower proportion of mining occupations and higher proportion of service and transportation occupations compared to- the d i s t r i b u t i o n of occupations i n West Kootenay. Respondents from both areas were compared.with respect to several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r the purpose of ascertaining the degree of s i m i l a r i t y between samples. As i s shown i n Table I I , only seven among the twenty two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s 3 examined were found to d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y between samples. Differences i n education completed were due to a greater proportion of West Kootenay respondents reporting a low educational level, and the lack of respondents i n West Kootenay reporting further t r a i n i n g a f t e r formal schooling contributed to another s i g n i f i c a n t difference between samples. Three migration factors constituted a large portion of the s i g n i f i c a n t differences between areas, as most West Kootenay respondents had l i v e d considerably longer i n t h e i r area, few were born outside Canada and many were born i n the area, and most had not migrated at a l l or had not moved from B r i t i s h Columbia. In comparison, the Vanderhoof West respondents consisted of few long-term residents and many recent migrants from other areas i n B r i t i s h Columbia and from outside Canada. The greater proportion of Vanderhoof West respondents not having a telephone i n the home and the greater distance t r a v e l l e d to work by West Kootenay respondents constituted the remaining s i g n i f i c a n t differences between areas.^ 22 TABLE I DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY INDUSTRY OF OCCUPATION Industry- West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. No. 1° Agriculture and Secondary Agriculture 3 2.9 4 3.0 Forestry and Secondary Forestry 38 36.5 40 30.8 Mining 16 15.4 6 4 . 6 Service, Transportation 23 22.1 50 38.5 Construction 17 16.4 14 10.8' Recreation, Other 7 6.7 16 12.3 Total 104 100.0 130 100.0 X2 = 1 5.84 df = 5 P < .01 23 TABLE II CHI SQUARE AND Z VALUES FOR WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLE DIFFERENCES ON SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS 1 Characteristic Test Value df . P Age X 2 4.02 2 >.05 Education Completed 8.14 3 <.05 M a r r i t a l Status 2.87 2 >.05 Training After Formal School 11.53 1 < .001 Time Lived i n Area 48.84 3 <.001 Area D i r e c t l y Migrated From 31 .51 3 <.001 Area of B i r t h 28.95 3 <.001 Father's Training After 5.40 2 >.05 Formal Schooling Own a Radio 0.08 1 >.05 Own a Telephone 12.67 1 <.001 Own a Car O.63 1 >.05 Take the Newspaper 1.07 1 >.05 Years i n Occupation 4.57 3 >.05 Self-Employed i n Main Job 2.48 1 . >.05 Work at Secondary Job 2.27 1 >.05 Work at Third Job 0.01 1 >.05 Recently Changed to New Job 0.89 1 >.05 Distance to Elementary School Z -1.13 >.05 Distance to Secondary School 0.35 >.05 Distance to Work 2 .30 ^.05 Average Distance to Services• -0.94 >.05 . Income 1.03 >.05 1. Values of Z were approximated using Wilcoxon's Rank-Sum Test. 24 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADULT EDUCATION Opportunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education i n West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West were compared with'.respect to types of courses offered, and number and hours of courses offered r e l a t i v e to the adult populations within the two areas. Proximity of respondents to schools and extent of recent migration into the areas by respondents were also examined as further factors of p a r t i c i p a t i o n opportunities. Night School Courses Assumptions were made that night school courses were the primary source of adult education i n r u r a l areas of. B r i t i s h Columbia, and that equality of,opportunity existed fo r another main source, correspondence courses. When night school courses were considered, school d i s t r i c t s i n West Kootenay were found to of f e r a greater number of courses than school d i s t r i c t s i n Vanderhoof West over the three-year period preceding the survey. Table I I I i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n by school d i s t r i c t and functional categories for West Kootenay's 355 and Vanderhoof West's 260 courses. When adult populations within the school d i s t r i c t s were considered, however, no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between areas with respect to r e l a t i v e opportunities for p a r t i c i p a t i o n , measured as number of courses or course-hours per person. As i s shown i n Table IV the types of courses according to function were unevenly d i s t r i b u t e d between the two survey areas, and the chi square value of 46.91 indicated the differences were s i g n i f i c a n t . West Kootenay school d i s t r i c t s emphasized Remedial and L i b e r a l functions while Vanderhoof West school d i s t r i c t s concentrated more on the Occupational function than those i n West Kootenay. TABLE I I I NIGHT SCHOOL COURSES OFFERED IN WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST School D i s t r i c t Course Functions-^ Remedial Occupational L i b e r a l Relational P o l i t i c a l Total Population No. Bourses No. Hours Age 20-64 per Person . per Person No. Hours No... Hours No. Hours No. Hours West Kootenay #7 Nelson 17 429 18 401 85 1554 120 2384 7965 .0150 .2993 #8 Slocan 0 0 2 64 0 0 2 64 1655 .0012 .0386 #9 Castlegar .'•'0 0 1 64 0 0 •1 64 5924 .0001 .0108 #10 Nakusp 0 0 1 42 20 375 21 417 1566 .0134 .2662 #11 T r a i l 59 1342 17 377 84 1556 160 3275 12877 .0124 .2543 #86 Creston 7 144 7 240. 37 702 51 1086 5245 .0097 .2070 Totals 83 1915 46 1188 226 4187 355 7290 35232 ( . 0 1 0 0 ) 3 ( .2069) Vanderhoof West #53 Terrace 30 1111 48 3237 55 1240 133 55BB 6573- .0202 .8501 #54 Smithers 13 354 20 797 44 891 77 2042 2936 .0262 .6955 #55 Burns Lake 4 56 6 172 9 134 19 362 2361 .0080 .1533 #56 Vanderhoof 5 98 20 455 6 76 31 629 3377 .0091 .1862 Totals 52 1619 94 4661 114 2341 260 8621 15247 ( .0170) ( .5654) Number of Courses per Person Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test : Wn = 26' n=4 m=6 P > . 0 5 Number of Course :-Hours per Person Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test: W=26 n=4 m=6 P >.05 1. Occupational course data i s missing f o r the 1965-1966 term i n both areas. 2. E f f e c t i v e date of population data i s June, 1966. Indians on reserves are excluded. Age Group Di s t r i b u t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia 1s.Population by School D i s t r i c t s . V i c t o r i a : Government of the-Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968. 3. Figures in brackets are not column totals. 26 TABLE IV SUMMARY DISTRIBUTION OF NUMBER OF NIGHT SCHOOL COURSES OFFERED IN WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST FROM MAY 1, 1964 to MAY 1, 1967 Area Course Function Remedial Occupational L i b e r a l Relational P o l i t i c a l Total No. No. i No. i No. f West Kootenay 83 23.4 Vanderhoof West 52 20.0 46 1 2 . 9 ' 226 63.7 355 100.0 94 36.2 114 43 .8 260 100.0 X 2 = 46.91 df = 2 p < . 0 0 1 Distance to Schools The proximity of respondents to night school courses, usually offered i n l o c a l schools, was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t between area samples. West Kootenay respondents t r a v e l l e d a mean distance of 3 .4 miles to elementary school, and Vanderhoof West respondents t r a v e l l e d a mean distance of 4 . 1 miles. As i s shown i n Table V, participants i n West Kootenay had a greater mean distance to t r a v e l than non-participants, but participants i n Vanderhoof West had a lesser mean distance to t r a v e l than non-participants. The mean differences i n distance t r a v e l l e d between participants and non-participants were less than one-half mile i n both areas and were assumed to be not important f o r the purposes of t h i s study. Overall samples did not d i f f e r , s i g n i f i c a n t l y from each other, as indicated by the z score of - 1 . 1 3 . Similarly, distances t r a v e l l e d to secondary schools were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t between samples, as indicated by a z score of 0 . 3 5 . 27 TABLE V DISTANCES TRAVELLED TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS Elementary School Secondary School West Vander- West Vander-Koot- hoof Koot- hoof enay West enay West Participants Number 14 12 15 5 Mean Distance 3.7 3 . 8 6 .6 6.0 Stand. Dev. 1.7 2 . 8 6.9 3.2 Non-Parti cipants Number 51 51 45 25 Mean Distance 3.3 4.2 ' 8.4 8.6 Stand. Dev. 2 .7 4.0 5.9 7.7 Total Number 65 63 60 30 Mean Distance 3 .4 4 . 1 8 .0 8.2 Stand. Dev. 2.5 3 .8 6.1 7.2 Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test Results f o r Differences Between Areas Elementary Secondary Wn 3959.5 2771.0 n 65 60 m 63 30 • • 2T 5024 567.5 z -1 .13 0.35 p >.05 >.05 1. Only respondents regularly associated with schools were measured. 28 Differences between participants and non-participants i n both areas with respect to mean distance t r a v e l l e d to secondary schools were r e l a t i v e l y great, but were not considered important f o r the purposes of t h i s study. Migration Into Survey Areas While night school courses were analyzed for the three-year period preceding' the survey, a l l respondents had not l i v e d i n the areas f o r the f u l l three year period. As shown i n Table VI, 30.76 per cent of West Kootenay respondents (32) had l i v e d i n the area f o r two years or less , and of these, four were participants. In Vanderhoof West thirty-one respondents (23.84$) had l i v e d i n the area f o r two years or le s s , and of these, nine were participants, so that 37.5 per cent of the twenty-four, participants had l i v e d i n the area for two years or l e s s . The differences between samples f o r lengths of time l i v i n g i n the areas were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t so that the estimated opportunities f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education within each area applied to both samples i n a sim i l a r fashion. 29 TABLE VI DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY LENGTH OF TIME IN AREA West Kootenay 2 Years or Less 3 Years or More Total No.. io No. io No. io Participants 4 20.0 16 80.0 20 100.0 Non-Participants 28 33.3 56 66.7 84 100.0 Total 32 30.8 72 69.2 104 100.0 Vanderhoof West Participants 9 37.5 15 62.5 24 100.0 Non-Participants 22 20.8 84 79.2 106 100.0 Total 31 ' 2 3 . 8 99 76.2 130 . 100.0 Chi Square Test Comparing Total Samples: X 2 = 1.41 df = 1 . p > .05 3 0 FOOTNOTES 1 . The survey areas selected are shown on a map i n Appendix A. 2. I n d u s t r i a l categories are d i s t i n c t and independent from occupational categories categorized i n t h i s study. 3 . Other comparisons of samples i n which the ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s were d i r e c t l y related to the dependent variables of the study were considered along, with the analyses of these variables. 4 . Where differences are- s i g n i f i c a n t between samples with respect to any c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , a table i s contained i n Appendix C. CHAPTER IV OCCUPATIONAL VARIABLES AND ADULT EDUCATION As was reported i n Chapter II I , when the assumption of equality of opportunity f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education between the two survey areas was tested a s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between areas with respect to d i s t r i b u t i o n of courses among--functions, but no s i g n i f i c a n t differences existed with respect to the a v a i l a b i l i t y of courses or proximity of respondents to schools. Si m i l a r l y , the two samples exhibited few s i g n i f i c a n t differences^with . respect to .the twenty-two personal c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s examined. Since s i m i l a r i t i e s between the samples and between opportun-i t i e s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education i n the two areas were evident, an analysis was performed with respect to each of the four occupational variables the study was focused upon. Total samples from.the two areas-were f i r s t compared with respect to each occupational variable and then participants were compared to non-participants within each area. F i n a l l y , participants and non-participants were compared with t h e i r counterparts i n the other area. OCCUPATIONAL STATUS As i s shown i n Table VII, the differences between West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West respondents measured with respect to occupational status were not s i g n i f i c a n t . A z score approximated from Wilcoxon's Rank-Sum Test had a value of -0.87, indicating that the occupational status of West Kootenay respondents was lower than that of Vanderhoof West respondents. The difference was not great enough to be s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , however. As i s also shown i n Table VII, participants, when compared to non-participants, had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher measures of occupational status i n 32 TABLE VII STATISTICS FOR OCCUPATIONAL STATUS West Kootenay Vanderhoof West N 104 130 Total Sample X 35.76 37.42 s 10.61 11.85 ' N 20 24 Participants X 39.78 46.19 s 13.23 16.94 N 84 106 Non-Participants X 34.81 35.44 s 9.74 9.38 W n 13 28 2027 Participants n 20 24 Compared to m 84 106 • Non-Participants £ T 427.5 445.5 z 2.30 2.73 P <.05 <.05 Participants Non-Participants Sample Compared to Compared to Compared to Participants No n-Pa r t i c i pant s Sample W n 413 7733.5 11,773-n 20 84 104 m 24 106 130 2T 9.5 1850.5 2,633.5 z - 0 . 8 7 - 0 . 7 7 - 0 . 8 7 P >.05 >.05 >.05 1. Appendix B contains s t a t i s t i c a l formulae. 33 both survey areas. The mean occupational status of West Kootenay participants was 39.78 compared to a mean status of 34.81 f o r non-participants. This difference was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , as indicated by an approximated z score of 2.30. Similarly, the mean occupational status score of participants i n Vanderhoof. West was ..46. 19,..,compared to the. mean score of 35.44 f o r non-participants.' This difference was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , with a z score of 2.73. No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found when participants i n the two areas were compared, and the same was true when non-participants were compared. OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY Twelve occupational categories were defined 'for the study, but several of these contained too few respondents to permit meaningful s t a t i s t i c a l t e sts over the f u l l range of categories. Four larger categories were then formed and were roughly defined as white c o l l a r , service, primary industry, and s k i l l e d craftsmen. Table VIII i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of area samples among the four occupational categories, and the chi square value of 5.53 accompanying the table indicates that the difference between the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the two samples was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t at the .05 l e v e l . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of participants and non-participants within each survey area with respect to the four occupational categories i s shown i n Table IX. In West Kootenay no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between participants and non-participants, even though the proportion of non-participants i n the primary industry category f a r exceeds the proportion of participants i n that category. The chi square value of 2.90 was not s i g n i f i c a n t at'the .05 l e v e l . In Vanderhoof West the d i s t r i b u t i o n of participants and non-participants among the four occupational categories was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , as may be seen i n Table IX. 34 TABLE VIII DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND' VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY"" GROUPED OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY Owners Clerical- Farms Craftsmen Tc Managers Sales Loggers Professional Service Fishermen Technical Transport Miners Laborers No. jo No. jo No. jo No. j No. West Kootenay 17 16 ,3 26 25.0 32 30.8 29 27.9 104 Vanderhoof West29 22.3 32 24.6 • 24 18.5 45 34.6 130 X 2 = 5.53 df = 3 p >>05 The chi square value of I . 6 9 was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the . 0 5 . l e v e l . When participants i n each area were compared to each other, t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n s across the four occupational categories were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t , as indicated by the chi square value of 0 . 5 4 . S i m i l a r l y , the non-participants were not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t when compared. The chi square value comparing non-participants between the two areas was 5 . 9 5 . JOB SATISFACTION When respondents i n West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West were compared with respect to rank sums of the Brayfield-• Rothe Index of Job S a t i s f a c t i o n no s i g n i f i c a n t differences were found. The z approximation of- 6.16 r e s u l t i n g from a comparison of t o t a l samples was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the..05 l e v e l . Differences between participants and non-participants i n West Kootenay were not s i g n i f i c a n t , as may be.seen i n Table X. The z value of - 1 . 2 7.indicated a tendency f o r 35 TABLE IX DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS' AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY ' Occupational Categories West Kootenay Vanderhoof West P a r t i c -ipants No. Non-P a r t i c -ipants P a r t i c -ipants No. 1o No. Non-P a r t i c -ipants No. Owners, Managers Professional Technical 4 20.0 13 15.5 7 29.2 22 20.8 C l e r i c a l , Sales, Service, Transportation, Communication, Recreation 6 30.0, 20 23.8 7 29.2 25 23.6 Farming, Mining, Lumbering, ; 3 15.0 29 34.5 Fishing," Laboring Craftsmen, Process Workers 7 35.0 22 26.2 3 12-. 5 21 19.8 7 29.2 38 35.8 Total 20 100.0 84 100.0 24 100.1 106-100.0 IT = 2.90 df = 3 P > .05 Chi Square Value of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants X 2 = 0.54 df = 3 P >.05 •x* = 1.69. df = 3 P > -05 Chi Square Value of West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Non-Part icipants J X 2 = 5.95 df = 3 p>.05 * This error i s due to rounding o f f percentages. 36 TABLE X STATISTICS FOR JOB SATISFACTION West Kootenay Vanderhoof West N • • 100. 127 Total Sample X 31.94 31.90 s ' 5 . 6 5 4.77 N 20 24 Participants X 30.55 31.54. s 5.69 3.38 N' 80 103 Non-Participants I 32.29 31.93 s 5.62 5.04 W n ...863 1312.5 Participants n 20 24 Compared to m 80 103 Non-Participants I T 503 3246.5 z - 1 . 2 7 -1 .39 P > .05 > .05 Participants Non-Participants Sample Compared to Compared to . Compared to Participants Non-Participants Sample Wn 433 7481 11,428.5 n 20 80 100 m 24 103 127 2T 129 ' 4476 9 ,432.5 z - 0 . 4 0 0.34 0.16 P >• 05 > . 0 5 >.05 37 non-participants to have greater degrees of job s a t i s f a c t i o n than participants, but the difference 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 . The z approximation f o r the comparison between participants and non-participants i n Vanderhoof West was also negative but not s i g n i f i c a n t . The z score of -1.39 indicated a trend for non-participants to have greater degrees of job s a t i s f a c t i o n than participants even though the difference was not significant.- Participants i n West Kootenay were compared with participants i n Vanderhoof West and the difference was found to be not s i g n i f i c a n t , although participants in.West Kootenay tended to have lesser rank sums of job .satisfaction than participants i n Vanderhoof West. The comparison of non-participants i n the two survey, areas with respect to job satisfaction>scores produced si m i l a r r e s u l t s , with a z score of 0.34 which was not -s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . For the purpose of analyzing separate components of the" Brayfield-Rothe Job S a t i s f a c t i o n Index, positions.of agreement were analyzed f o r the nine i n d i v i d u a l statements used i n the survey. As may be seen i n Table XI, when a l l respondents from the two areas were compared, s i g n i f i c a n t differences'at the .05 l e v e l were found with respect to three statements. Those three s i g n i f i c a n t differences were indicated by the values of 6.12 for the statement,"My job i s l i k e a hobby to me.", 10.46 f o r the statement,"I f e e l that my job i s no more - in t e r e s t i n g than others I could get.", and 9.08 for the statement, "Each day of work seems l i k e i t w i l l never end." Each of- the-three chi square values was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . Participants i n West Kootenay were compared to participants i n Vanderhoof West with respect to the s i x statements where the o v e r a l l samples did not d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y . For those s i x statements, chi square te s t s were used and no s i g n i f i c a n t differences were found TABLE XI CHI SQUARE VALUES AND T RATIO PROBABILITY LEVELS FOR COMPARISONS' BY POSITIONS OF AGREEMENT ON JOB SATISFACTION STATEMENTS1 Statement Samples Compared Participants West Vanderhoof 1. My job i s l i k e a hobby to me. 2. It seems that my friends are more interested i n t h e i r work than I am. 3. I enjoy my work more than my le i s u r e time. 6.12 5.88 0.61 4. I am often bored with my job. 5. I f e e l f a i r l y well s a t i s f i e d with my job. 6. I f e e l that my job i s no more interesting than others I could get.10.46 7. I d e f i n i t e l y d i s l i k e my work. 8. Each day of work seems l i k e i t w i l l never end. 9. I f i n d r e a l enjoyment i n my work. 1.37 1.99 I . 6 3 4.89 9.08 Compared Kootenay West Participants Participants and Non- and Non-Participants Participants Compared Compared >.05 0.06 2.90 1.35 O.48 > .05 4.36 > .05 3.67 "2™ 1.31 2.56 6.81 1.19 2.79 1.61 2.95 I . 6 9 3.59 5.8,3 0.66 2.09 3.17 0.98 1.74 1.34 1.78 1.15 1. A l l chi square values have df=2, and a l l chi square values s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l are underlined. 2. Each statement contained three proportional differences to t e s t . No s p e c i f i c t values resulted from the tests, and the,.highest significance l e v e l reached i s reported for each statement where the t ratio was used. 39. between participants i n the two areas. Because the two samples d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y with respect to positions of agreement fo r the remaining three statements participants from the two separate samples were compared by a t ratio. . which was,used to test the significance of the difference. of the proportion of participants i n each sample selecting any given position f o r a job s a t i s f a c t i o n statement with respect to the -total number of respondents i n the sample selecting that given position. None of the differences i n proportion were s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l f o r any 2 p o s i t i o n on any of the three statements. Participants i n West Kootenay were compared to non-participants with respect to positions of agreement fo r i n d i v i d u a l job s a t i s f a c t i o n statements, and one s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found at the .05 l e v e l . Table XII i l l u s t r a t e s that non-participants enjoyed work more than l e i s u r e time to'a greater degree than was so for participants, as indicated by the chi square value of 6.81. Vanderhoof West participants were compared to non-participants i n a simi l a r fashion, and no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found. TABLE XII RESPONSE.DISTRIBUTION OF PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS IN WEST KOOTENAY FOR THE JOB SATISFACTION STATEMENT "I ENJOY MY WORK MORE THAN MY LEISURE TIME" Disagree Uncertain- Agree Total No~ fo NoT J° NoT fo No. io Participants 14 7 0 . 0 3 15.0 3 15.0 20 100.0 Non-Participants 32 4 0 . 0 12 15.0 36 45 ,0 80 100.0 X 2 = 6.81 df = ;2 p < .05 40 OCCUPATIONAL MOBILITY Occupational mobility of respondents was based upon measures of occupational status, and two separate mobility components were considered. Sequential job mobility was defined as the arithmetic difference between a respondent's present job and his f i r s t preceding job, where both were measured by Blishen scores of occupational status. Those respondents who acquired higher occupational status by way of changing jobs were defined as having positive or upward sequential job mobility. S i m i l a r l y , the differences between a respondent's present job and his father's, job were measured to determine the d i r e c t i o n of movement with respect to occupational status a respondent had acquired r e l a t i v e to the father's status which was used as a base l i n e . By combining the differences of the two previous'measures, an a r t i f i c i a l separation was created so that those respondents who had been upwardly mobile f o r both measures were forced toward higher measures of mobility i n a positive d i r e c t i o n , and those respondents who had been downwardly mobile for both measures were forced to more negative positions. Those respondents who had l i t t l e mobility f o r either measure or who had no consistent trend remained near the neutral mobility area of the scale. For each of the.three measures, the d i r e c t i o n alone was considered f i r s t so that an o v e r a l l i n d i c a t i o n of trends could be ascertained'before more refined measures took both d i r e c t i o n and degree of mobility into account. Sequential Job Mobil i t y ' As may be. seen i n Table XIII, no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found f o r any of the comparisons which were made with respect to d i r e c t i o n alone of sequential job mobility. When the t o t a l samples were compared a chi square 41 TABLE XIII DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS- BY DIRECTION OF-SEQUENTIAL JOB MOBILITY Mob i l i t y Direction Positive Negative . No. No. West Kootenay 1 Participants 13 76.5 4 23.5 Non-Participants 36 52.2 33 47.3 Total 49 57.0 37 43.0 Vanderhoof West Participants 12 66.7 6 33.3 Non-Participants 44 51.2 42 48.8 Total 56 53.8 48 46.2 Chi square values, each with df = : 1: Sample compared to Sample 0.19- p "">.05 West Kootenay Participants to Non-Participants 3«2'8 p ">.05 Vanderhoof West Participants' to Non-Participants 1.44 .p "X05 Participants compared to Participants 0.41 P X 0 5 Non-Participants compared to Non-Participants 0.02 p 05 1. Two West Kootenay participants had scores of 0.0- and one had no previous job. Four non-participants had scores of 0.0 and eleven had no previous jobs. 2. One Vanderhoof West participant had a score of 0.0 and f i v e had no previous jobs. Seven non-participants had scores of 0.0 and thi r t e e n had no previous jobs. V'2 value of 0 .19 was calculated and that was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . S i m i l a r l y , the chi square value of 0.41 f o r the comparison of participants i n each sample was not s i g n i f i c a n t , nor was the chi square value of 0 .02 for the comparison of non-participants between..samples. Participants were compared to non-participants within each area and i n both cases the differences were not s i g n i f i c a n t . West Kootenay had a value of 3 .•28 and Vanderhoof West had a value of 1.44 f o r the comparison f o r the comparison of participants to non-participants. As may be seen i n Table XIV the samples were compared with respect to both d i r e c t i o n and.degree of mobility and a z score of 0.23. indicated the difference between samples was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . In West Kootenay the participants were compared to the non-participants and a s i g n i f i c a n t difference, was found. The z score of 2.27-was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , i n d i c a t i n g that participants had a greater degree of p o s i t i v e mobility than had non-participants. Participants were compared to non-participants i n Vanderhoof West and no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found, but the z score of 1.81 suggested that participants were more upwardly mobile than non-participants even though the difference 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 . A z score-, of 0 .66 f o r the comparison of participants between samples was not s i g n i f i c a n t , nor was the z score of - 0 . 1 6 f o r the comparison of non-participants between samples. Intergeneration M o b i l i t y No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found with respect"to d i r e c t i o n alone of intergeneration mobility when West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West samples were compared. A chi square value of 0 .004 f o r the comparison of the two t o t a l samples was not s i g n i f i c a n t , nor were the chi-square values of 0 .45 f o r the comparison of participants to non-participants i n West Kootenay and the value of O.63 f o r the s i m i l a r TABLE XIV STATISTICS FOR SEQUENTIAL JOB MOBILITY West Kootenay Vanderhoof-West N ' 92 112 Total Sample X 1.83 1.23 s 9.84 11.70- ' N 19 19 Participants X 7,03 4.05 s 12.37 12.69 N 73 93 Non-Part i c ipant s I 0.48 0 . 6 5 -s 8.67 11.48. Participants Compared to Non-Participants w n 1119 1280.5 n 19 19 m 73 93' £ T 23.5 62.5 ' z 2.27 1.81 P < .05 > . 0 5 Participants Non-Participants Sample Compared to Compared to Compared to Participants Non-Participants Sample-Wn 393 6045 9525.5 n 19 73 92 m 19 93 112 HT 2.5 153 280.5 z 0.66 - 0 . 1 6 0.23-P > . 0 5 > .05 >.05 44 comparison i n Vanderhoof west, as may be seen i n Table XV. Participants i n West Kootenay were.compared to participants i n Vanderhoof West and the chi square value of 0.06 which -was calculated was not s i g n i f i c a n t . S i m i l a r l y , non-participants i n both areas were compared to each other -with respect to d i r e c t i o n of intergeneration mobility and the difference was not s i g n i f i c a n t , as indicated by the chi square value of 0.18. West Kootenay respondents were compared to Vanderhoof West respondents with respect to both d i r e c t i o n and degree of intergeneration mobility, and the difference was found to be not s i g n i f i c a n t , as may be seen i n Table XVI. The West Kootenay participants were compared to the West Kootenay non-participants-and the participants'were found to have a mean intergeneration mobility score of 5.45 i n comparison to the non-participant mean of 0.28. The difference 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 , however. In Vanderhoof West, a si m i l a r trend was evident, as the participant mean score was 8.93 and the non-participant mean score was -0.55. Again, the difference 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 even though a trend was evident for participants to be more upwardly mobile than non-participants.- Participants were compared between areas and the z score of -.42 was not s i g n i f i c a n t . Non-participants i n each area were then compared with each other and the difference was not s i g n i f i c a n t . The z score was -0.03. Mobili t y Score West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West t o t a l samples were compared with respect to d i r e c t i o n of mobility score and a chi square value of 0.09 was calculated which was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l . In West Kootenay a significant difference was found between participants and non-participants i A C -TABLE XV DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY DIRECTION OF INTERGENERATION MOBILITY Mobility Direction Positive Ne^  native No, No. West Kootenay 1 Participants 10 52.,6 . 9 47.4 Non-Participants 33 44.0 42 56.0 Total . %2> 4 5:. .7^  51 54.3 2 Vanderhoof West Participants 13 -5"6.5 -10 " '43.5 Non-Participants 44' 47.3 49 52.7 Tot a l 57 49.1 59 50.9 Chi square values, each with df = 1: Sample compared to Sample 0.004 p^.05 West Kootenay Participants to Non-Participants 0.45 p 05 Vanderhoof West Participants to Non-Participants O .63 p>.05 Participants Compared to Participants 0 . 0 6 p >.05 Non-Participants Compared to Non-Participants ' 0.18 p >.05 1. One participant i n West Kootenay had no score and nine non-participants had scores, of 0.0. . 2. One participant i n Vanderhoof West had a score of 0.0 and ten non-participants had scores of 0.0. Three non-participants had no scores. 4r6 TABLE XVI STATISTICS FOR INTERGENERATION MOBILITY . West Kootenay • Vanderhoof West N " 103 127 Total Sample X 1.24 1.24 s 9.36 14.41 N 19 ' 2 4 Participants X 5.45 8.93 ' s 12.86 19.11 N 84 103 Non-Part i c i pant s X 0.28 - 0 . 5 5 s 8.17 1 2 . 5 3 -W n 1171.5 . 1820.5 Participants n 19 24 Compared to m 84 ' 103 Non-Participants £T 141 148.5 z 1.56 1.75 • P > . 0 5 > .05 Participants Non-Participants Sample Compared to Compared to Compared to Participants Non-Participants Sample W n 401 7885 • 11,716 n 19 84 103 m 24 " 103 127 £T 0.5 805.0 997.5 z - 0 . 4 1 - 0 . 0 3 - 0 . 1 0 P > . 0 5 •>.05 > .05 4?7 when t h e i r mobility scores were compared. The chi square value of 5.19 was s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l , and i t suggested that participants had s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater proportion of upward mobility on the combined mobility score than was so for non-participants. In Vanderhoof West no s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between participants and non-participants with respect to d i r e c t i o n of mobility scores. The chi square value of 2.81 was not significant.. Participants i n West Kootenay were compared to participants i n Vanderhoof West, and the chi square value of Q.30 was not s i g n i f i c a n t , as may be seen i n Table XVII. Sim i l a r l y , a value of 0.0001 was calculated f o r the comparison of non-participants between samples and that was not s i g n i f i c a n t West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West t o t a l samples were compared with respect to both d i r e c t i o n and degree of mobility scores and the difference was found to be not s i g n i f i c a n t , with a chi square value calculated to be 0 . 8 9 . In West Kootenay a s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between participants and non-participants with respect to mobility scores and the chi square of 2.73 i s shown i n Table XVIII. Participants' were found to have greater upward mobility with a mean score of 14.15 as "compared to the mean score of 0 .41 f o r non-participants. In the survey area of Vanderhoof West differences' between participants and non-participants were'not s i g n i f i c a n t even though participant appeared to have greater upward mobility than non-participant The value of chi square was 0..92. No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between participants i n the two survey areas. The value of 0.94 may be seen i n Table XVIII. Similarly, no. s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between non-participants i n the two samples, as indicated by the chi square value of 0 . 2 3 . 4l8 TABLE XVII DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY.. AND VANDERHOOF WEST, PARTICIPANTS AND- NON-PARTICIPANTS BY DIRECTION OF MOBILITY SCORE --Mobili t y Direction .. Positive Negative No. .'-fo No'.' West Kootenay 1 Participants 12 66.7 6 33.3 Non-Participants 27 37.0 46 63.O Total 39 42.9 52 57.1 2 Vanderhoof West Participants 11 57.9 8 42.1 Non-Participants 33 37.1 56 62.'9 Total 44 40.7 64 .59.3 Chi square values, each with df = 1: Sample compared to Sample 0.09 p>.05 West Kootenay Participants to Non-Participants 5.19 p<.0-5 Vanderhoo'f West Participants to Non-Participants 2.81 p >. 05 Participants Compared to Participants 0.30 p >.05 Non-Participants Compared to Non-Participants 0.0001 pX05 1. Two West Kootenay participants and eleven non-participants had no mobility score. , 2. Five Vanderhoof West participants and sixteen non-. participants had.no mobility score, and one non-participant had.a mobility score of 0.0. TABLE XVIII STATISTICS FOR MOBILITY SCORE West Kootenay VanderHo'of West N 91 . 109 ' Total Sample X 3.13 0 .92-s 17 .52 2 2 . 6 6 . N 18 19-Participants X 14.15 7.99 s 24 .22 25.78 . N 73 90 No n—Pa r t i c i pant s X 0 .41 - 0 . 5 7 s 14 .40 21 . 81 • W n 1102.5 1160 Participants n 18 19 Compared to m 73 90 Non-Participants £T 3.5 8 z 2.73 0 .92 P < .05 >.05 . Participants Non-Participants Sample. Compared to Compared to Compared to Participants Non-Participants Sample Wn .373 6053.5 ' 9510 n 18 73 '91 m. 19 90 109 $T 0 20 26 z 0 .94 0.23 0.89 p >.05 >.05 > .05 50 FOOTNOTES 1 . Included i n Appendix D are frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the four major occupational variables. . • " ' 2. Distributions of these proportions are to be found i n Appendix D. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . Occupation has become increasingly important as a central focus of l i f e i n urbanized s o c i e t i e s and a great deal of man's behavior i s either d i r e c t l y related to i t or arises from the individual's position i n the community ascribed by his occupation. Concurrent with the r i s e of occupation to prominence has.been the changing focus of adult education to deal with problems of urbanization and technology. The purpose of t h i s study was to assess the rel a t i o n s h i p between four occupational variables and pa r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education among non-farm residents i n two r u r a l areas of B r i t i s h Columbia. SUMMARY Two ARDA survey areas i n r u r a l B r i t i s h Columbia,. West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West, were selected as areas of low and high socio-economic standing r e l a t i v e to other r u r a l areas i n the province. Each area was surveyed i n I967 and data were collected from household heads residing on a random sample of pre-empted l o t s . After farmers, r e t i r e d , and unemployed persons were eliminated from the o r i g i n a l samples, interview schedules f o r the remaining 104.respondents i n West Kootenay and 130 respondents i n Vanderhoof West were used i n the analysis. The Areas Studied Samples-from the two survey areas were compared with respect to several c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , but of the twenty-two c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s examined, only seven s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d West Kootenay respondents from Vanderhoof West respondents: education completed, t r a i n i n g a f t e r formal school completed, use of telephone i n home, area of b i r t h , 52 area moved d i r e c t l y from, time l i v e d i n area, and distance t r a v e l l e d to work. None of these c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d the four o c c u p a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s . O p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education i n each area were estimated by a n a l y z i n g Department of Education records f o r night school courses i n each school d i s t r i c t w i t h i n the survey areas. West Kootenay provided 355 evening courses compared to 260 i n Vanderhoof West during the three years p r i o r to the surveys, however, West Kootenay•s ad u l t population of 35232 compared to the 15247 adu l t p o p u l a t i o n of Vanderhoof West i n d i c a t e d that Vanderhoof West provided more courses per person than d i d West Kootenay. The school d i s t r i c t s i n both areas were ranked with respect to the number of courses o f f e r e d per person -and number of hours o f f e r e d per person, and.a Wilcoxon Rank-Sum Test suggested there was no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the two survey areas. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of courses among adult education f u n c t i o n s d i f f e r e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y between areas because West Kootenay appeared to emphasize the L i b e r a l f u n c t i o n and Vanderhoof West "' • appeared to emphasize the Occupational f u n c t i o n . A c c e s s i b i l i t y to courses by respondents i n each sample was estimated by comparing distances t r a v e l l e d to .. schools. No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was found between samples w i t h respect to distance t r a v e l l e d to e i t h e r elementary or secondary schools. M i g r a t i o n i n t o the areas was analyzed to determine the p r o p o r t i o n of people l i v i n g i n the area f o r more than two years, which would l i m i t them to o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e w i t h i n the area. Of West Kootenay respondents, 30.8- per cent had a r r i v e d i n the area w i t h i n the previous two years, but of these recent migrants only 12.5 per cent reported p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education. Of the Vanderhoof 53 West sample, 23.8 per cent were recent migrants but'29 .per .• cent of that group reported p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult.education. Participants and Non-Participants Within each survey area participants and non-participants were compared with respect to four occupational factors. Scores on the Blishen occupational status scale were s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher f o r participants than f o r non-participants i n both survey areas. Occupationai" "categories of the samples i n both areas were widely d i s t r i b u t e d among the twelve d i v i s i o n s . When four major groups of categories were considered, no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between participants and non-participants was found i n either survey area. Job s a t i s f a c t i o n scale scores were r e l a t i v e l y ; h i g h i n both areas, and no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between participants and non-participants was found i n either area. With respect to occupational mobility, participants were generally more mobile i n an upward d i r e c t i o n even though the differences were not always s i g n i f i c a n t . No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found i n Vanderhoof West for any of the three occupational mobility measures, when participants and non-participants were compared. In West Kootenay a s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found between participants and non-participants with respect to sequential job mobility, as participants were more upwardly mobile than non-participants. The s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n sequential job' mobility contributed to a s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n o v e r a l l mobility score between West Kootenay participants and non-participants. Participants had s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater mobility i n an upward d i r e c t i o n than did non-participants when only the d i r e c t i o n of mobility was considered and when both d i r e c t i o n and degree of mobility scores were considered. . 54 West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West Participants No s i g n i f i c a n t difference was found with respect to any of the four occupational variables when participants i n each of the two survey areas were compared. Participants i n Vanderhoof West appeared to exhibit higher occupational status, greater job s a t i s f a c t i o n , and more intergeneration mobility i n an upward d i r e c t i o n than was so f o r participants i n West Kootenay, but the differences were 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 . Participants i n West Kootenay were more upwardly mobile with respect to sequential job mobility than were participants i n Vanderhoof West but the difference was not s i g n i f i c a n t . CONCLUSIONS Hypothesis one was only p a r t i a l l y rejected. Participants had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher measures of occupational status than did non-participants, and West Kootenay participants had s i g n i f i c a n t l y greater upward mobility with respect to sequential job mobility than- did West Kootenay non-participants. On measures of job satisfaction-and occupational category, hypothesis one was accepted as no s i g n i f i c a n t difference between participants and non-participants was found. Hypothesis two was f u l l y accepted. No s i g n i f i c a n t difference with respect to any ©f-.athe occupational factors was found between participants i n West Kootenay and Vanderhoof West. While clear occupational d i s t i n c t i o n s existed among the samples studied, p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education seemed to cut across most measures of occupation. It would appear that the occupational measures used i n t h i s study do not hold promise f o r e f f e c t i v e prediction of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education within r u r a l areas of B r i t i s h Columbia. 55 The findings of t h i s study would appear to* uphold -the opinions of those writers who claim rural" people are less c l e a r l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from each other with respect to many ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s than are urban people.. If.that assumption holds true then i t follows that prediction of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education w i l l be much more d i f f i c u l t i n r u r a l than i n urban areas i f descriptive, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ; such as occupational variables are to be used i n the- -prediction process. This study has used r e l a t i v e l y fine-grained measures of occupation, and judging 'from the r e s u l t s of the study, the p o s s i b i l i t y -exists that the broader categories and measures used i n previous studies by other researchers are as e f f e c t i v e as the measures used i n t h i s study, as well as allowing for-more economical use. Although the present study has not succeeded i n revealing any new occupational factors of significance to the prediction of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n adult education within r u r a l areas, one new approach has been opened which w i l l require further analysis i n the future. The use of occupational status scores and the manipulation of them fo r the purpose' of formulating components of occupational mobility may become increasingly important i n research as adult education becomes more necessary to those people attempting to succeed i n the work world. 56 BIBLIOGRAPHY Age Group D i s t r i b u t i o n of B r i t i s h Columbia's Population  by School D i s t r i c t s . V i c t o r i a : Government of the Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968. Blackburn, D.J. Guelph Adult P a r t i c i p a t i o n Patterns. Guelph, Ontario: Department of Extension Education, University of Guelph, 1968. Blishen, B.R. "The Construction and Use of An Occupational Class Scale," Canadian Journal of Economics and  P o l i t i c a l Science, 24: 519-531, 1958. ! " " . "A Socio-Economic Index fo r Occupations i n Canada," Th"e Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 4: 41-53, 1967. : Bonjean, CM., Bruce, G.D., and Williams, A.J. VSocial Mobility and Job S a t i s f a c t i o n : A Replication and Extension," S o c i a l Forces, 45: 492-501, 1967. Booth, A. "A Demographic Consideration of Non-Participation," Adult Education, 11: 223-229, 1 9 6 1 . Bradley, J.V. Distribution-Free S t a t i s t i c a l Tests. Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968. Bray f i e l d , A.H. and Rothe, H.F. "An Index of Job S a t i s f a c t i o n , " Journal of Applied Psychology, 35: 307-311, 1951. Bruce, G.D., Bonjean, CM., and Williams, J.A. "Job S a t i s f a c t i o n Among Independent.Businessmen: A Correlative Study," Sociology and S o c i a l Research, 52: 195-204, 1968. •Brunner, E. deS., et a l . An Overview of Adult Education  Research. 'Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A.,.1959. . Bryson, L. Adult Education. Boston; American Book Company, 1936. Campbell, W.G. Form and Style i n Thesis Writing. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Company, 1954. 57 Clarke, A.C. "The Use of Leisure and i t s Relation to Levels of Occupational Prestige," American S o c i o l o g i c a l  Review, 21: 301-307, 1956. Curtis, R.F. "Occupational Mob i l i t y and Membership i n Formal Voluntary Associations: A Note on Research," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 24: 846-848, 1959. Davies, V. A Rapid Method f o r Determining the Significance  pf the Difference Between Two Percentages"! Pullman, Washington: The Author, no date. Dickinson, J.G. "An A n a l y t i c a l Survey of the Pemberton Valley i n B r i t i s h Columbia with Special Reference to Adult Education." Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968. ' "Rural Adult Education." Unpublished research manuscript, Department of Adult Education, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1970. , and Davison, CV. "Identifying Socio-Economic D i s p a r i t i e s Among Rural Areas." Unpublished research report, University of British...Columbia, .Vancouver, J . 9 6 9 . , and Verner, C. Community-Structure and P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Adult Education. Vancouver: Faculty of Education, University of British•Columbia, 1969. Douglah, M. and Moss, G. " D i f f e r e n t i a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n Patterns of Adults of Low and High Educational Attainment," Adult Education, 18: 247-259, 1968. Duncan, O.D. and Hodge, R.W. "Education and Occupational Mobility: A Regression Analysis," The American Journal  of Sociology, 68: 629-644, 1963. Geschwender, J.A. "Theory and Measurement of Occupational Mobility: A Re-Examination," American S o c i o l o g i c a l  Review, 26: 451-452, 1961. Giffen, P.J. "Adult Education and the Rural Community," Canadian Journal of Economics and P o l i t i c a l Science 13: 533-544, 1947. : ~"' Goard, D.S. "An Analysis of Participants i n Rural Adult Education." Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968. 58 Goard, D.S. and Dickinson, J.G. The Influence of Education  and Age on Pa r t i c i p a t i o n i n Rural Adult Education. Vancouver: Faculty of Education, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968. Gross, E. "The Occupational Variable as a Research Category," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 24: 64O-649, 1 9 5 9 . Holden, J.B. "A Survey of P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Adult Education Classes," Adult Leadership, 10: 258-260, 1958. Johnstone, J.W. C and Rivera, R.J. Volunteers for Learning. • Chicago: Aldine Publishing, 1965. Kaplan, A.A. Socio-Economic Circumstances and Adult P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Certain Cultural and Educational  A c t i v i t i e s . Teachers College, Columbia University, 1943. Knox, A.B. "Cl i e n t e l e Analysis," Review of Educational  Research, 35: 231-239, 1965. , and Videbeck, R. "Adult Education and Adult L i f e Cycle," Adult Education, 13: 102-121, 1963. Lastrucci, C L . "The Status and • Significance. of.. Occupational Research," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 1.1:. 78-84, 1946. Lazerwitz, B. ^National Data on P a r t i c i p a t i o n Rates'Among - • Residential Belts i n the United States," American  S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 27: 69I-696, 1962. Lipset, S.M. and Bendix, R. "Soci a l M o b i l i t y and Occupational Career Patterns," American Journal of Sociology, 57: 366-373 and 494-504, 1952. London, J. -*?Attitudes Toward Adult Education by Soci a l Class," Adult Education, 13: 226-233, 1963. , and Carey, J.T. "Adult Education and Society," -Review of Educational Research, 29: 237-245, 1959. Wenkert, R., and Hagstrom, W.0. Adult Education and S o c i a l Class. Survey Research Center, University of C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, 1963. Loomis, C-. P. et_ a l . Rural S o c i a l Systems and Adult Education. The Michigan State College Press, 1953. 59 M i l l e r , H. P a r t i c i p a t i o n of Adults i n Education: A Force-Field Analysis. Center.for the'Study of L i b e r a l Education f o r Adults, Boston University, 1967. "~'7~.. Mizruchi, E.H. and Vanaria, L.M. "Who Participates i n Adult Education?" Adult Education 10: 141-143, i 9 6 0 . Nam, B. and Powers, M.G. "Changes i n the Relative Status Level of Workers i n the United States," S o c i a l Forces, 47:. 158-170, 1968. Newberry, J.S. " P a r t i c i p a t i o n and Adult Education," Unpublished review of. research, Columbia University, 1958. Occupational C l a s s i f i c a t i o n Manual: Census of Canada, I 9 6 I . Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1961. ~S~-Oldman, D. and I l l s l e y , R. "Measuring the Status o'f Occupations," Sociological' Review, 14: 5 3 - 7 2 , . 1 9 6 6 . Participants i n Further Education i n Canada. Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1'963. Patchen, M. "The E f f e c t of Reference Group Standards on -Job S a t i s f a c t i o n s , " Human Relations, 11: 303-314, 1958. P e l l e g r i n , R.J. and Bates, F.L. "Congruity and Incongruity of Status Attributes Within Occupations and Work Positions," S o c i a l Forces, 3 8 : 23-28, i 9 6 0 . Pineo, D.C. and Porter, J. "Occupational Prestige i n Canada," The Canadian Review of Sociology and  Anthropology, 4: 24-40, 1967. Reiss, A.J. "Occupational Mobility, of Professional Workers," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 20: 693-700, 1955. . . ., Occupations and S o c i a l Status. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 1961. Rettig, S., Jacobson, F.N., and Pasamanick, B. "Status Overestimation, Objective Status, and Job S a t i s f a c t i o n Among Professions," American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, . 23: 75-81, 1958. Siegel, S. Nonparametric S t a t i s t i c s f o r the Behavioral, Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956. 60 Stapel, J. "What i s Job Sat i s f a c t i o n ? " Public Opinion  Quarterly, 14: 551-554, 1950. Super, D.E. "Occupational Level and Job S a t i s f a c t i o n , " Journal of Applied Psychology, 2 3 : 547-564, 1 9 3 9 . Tumin, M.M. and Feldman, A.S. "Theory and Measurement of Occupational Mobil i t y , " American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review, 22: 281-288, 1957. Verner, C. Planning and Conducting a Survey: A Case Study Ottawa: Rural Development Branch, Department of Forestry and Rural Development, 1967 . , and Booth, A. Adult Education. Washington: Center f o r Applied Research i n Education, 1964. , and Newberry, J. "The .Nature of Adult P a r t i c i p a t i o n , " Adult Education, 8: 202-222, 1 9 6 8 . , and Dickinson, J.G. A Socio-Economic Survey of tTTe West Kootenay Area i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Report #6, ARDA Canada Land Inventory Project #49009, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968. , Dickinson, J.G., and Anderson, D.V. A Socio- Economic Survey of the Vanderhoof West Area i n • B r i t i s h Columbia. Report #7, ARDA Canada Land Inventory Project #49009, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1968. 61 APPENDIX A 63 APPENDIX B 64 T RATIO1 P - P t •= Where P-^  = the proportion of sample 1 selecting a given position Pg = the proportion of sample 2 selecting a given p o s i t i o n n l P l + n 2 P 2 n l + n 2 Q = 1 - P n-^  = the number of indivi d u a l s i n sample 1 = the number of indivi d u a l s i n sample 2 1. V. Davies, A Rapid Method f o r Determining the Significance of the Difference Between Two Percentages (Pullman, Washington: the author, no date). 65 Z APPROXIMATION FROM WILCOXON'S RANK-SUM TEST w n( n+m+1) 2 Z = mn (m+n+1) _ mn ^ t 3 _ t j 12 12(m+n)(m+n-l) Where Wn i s the sum of ranks of the smaller group n i s the size of the smaller group m i s the size of the larger group t i s the number of t i e s scores for any given rank. 1. J.V. Bradley, Distribution-Free S t a t i s t i c a l Tests. (Englewood C l i f f s , N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968) pp.105-117. 66 APPENDIX C 67 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY EDUCATION COMPLETED Education Completed West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. 1° No. 1o Grades 1 - 8 56 53.9 53 : 40.8 Grades 9 - 11 30 28.8 43 33.1 Grade 12 7 6.7 23 17.7 University 1 Year + 11 10.6 11 a.4 Total 104 100.0 130 100.0 X 2 = 8.14 df = 3 P < .05 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAI AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY TRAINING AFTER FORMAL SCHOOL COMPLETED West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. * No. ' Some Tra i n i n g After School .31 29.8 - 66 52.0 No Training After School 73 70.2 61 48.0 Total 104 100.0 127 100.0 X 2 = 11.53 df = 1 P < .001 68 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY TIME LIVED IN AREA Years Lived i n Area West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. No. i 2 or less 4 3.8 31 23.8 • 3 - 1 0 15 14.4 44 33.9 • 11 - 20 16 15.4 24 18.5 20 and over 69 66.4 31 23.8 Total 104 100.0 130 100.0 X 2 = 48.84 df = 3 P < .001 -DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES B^  AREA OF BIRTH Area of Bi r t h West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. i • No. i This Area 34.6 13 10. o' B r i t i s h Columbia 6 5.8 20 15.4 Canada 45 43.3 52 • 4 0 . 0 Other 17 16.3 45 34.6 Total' 104 100.0 130 100.0 2 X^ = 28.95 df = 3 P < .001 69 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY AREA DIRECTLY : MIGRATED FROM Area Moved From West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. No. Not Applicable 32 30.8 13 10.0 B r i t i s h Columbia 17 16.3 59 45.4 Canada 42 40.4 36 27.7 Other 1 3 12.5 22 16.9 Total 104 100.0 130 100.0 ' x 2 = . 31.51 df - 3 p < .001 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY TELEPHONE IN HOME West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. * No. Telephone i n Home 88 84.6 83 63.8 No Telephone i n Home 16 15.4 47 36.2 Total 104 100.0 130 100.0' X 2 =12.67 df = 1 p < .001 STATISTICS FOR WORK DISTANCE Mean Standard Deviation West Kootenay 14.69 28.65 Vanderhoof West 12.19 24-90 70 w n = 12,470 n = 104 m = 114 £T= 8550.5 z = 2.3 71 APPENDIX D 72 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST.PARTICIPANTS AND NON-•PARTICIPANTS . BY BLISHEN OCCUPATIONAL STATUS SCORES B l i s h e n West Kootenay Vanderhoof West Scores P a r t i c -i p a n t s Non- ' P a r t i c -i p a n t s P a r t i c -i p a n t s Non-Partic-ipant s N=20. N=84 N=24 N=106 55 + • i 10.0 j 6.0 25.0 . 3 .8 50 - 54 0 . 0 2.4 16.7 6.6 45 - 49 10.0 2.4 8.3 1.9 40 - 44 5.0 10.7 8.3 16.0 35 - 39 30.0 10.7 4 . 2 8.5 30 - 34 25.0 23.8 16.7 18 .9 25 - 29 20.0 4 4 . 0 20.8 44.3 T o t a l 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 I 73 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAI AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BI OCCUPATIONAL-CATEGORY Occupational Category West Kootenay Vanderhoof West No. - No-. Owners and Managers 11 10 . 6 19 1 4 . 6 Professional and Technical 6 5.8 10 7.7 C l e r i c a l 3 2.9 1 0 .8 Sales 6 5.8 4 3 .1 Service and"Recreation 4 3.8 5 3.8 Transport and Communication 13 12 .5 22 16 .9 Farm Workers 1 1.0 3 2.3 Loggers 12 11 .5 11 8.5 Fishermen, Trappers, Hunters 0 0.0 1 0 .8 Miners, Quarrymen 4 3.8 3 2.3 Craftsmen, Production Process 29 27.9 45 34.. 6 Laborers 15 14 .4 6 4 . 6 Total 104 100 .0 130 100 .0 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY JOB SATISFACTION SCORES S a t i s f a c t i o n West : Kootenay Vanderhoof West Scores P a r t i e i p a n t s Non-P a r t i c -i p a n t s P a r t i c -i p a n t s Non-P a r t i c -i p a n t s N=20 N=84 "N=24. N=106 37+ 5.0 19.1 0.0 5.7 33 - 36 40.0 33.3 54.2 56.6 29 - 32 35.0 27.4 20.8 16.0 25 - 28 0.0 7.1 20.8 14.2 21 - 24 10.0 4.8 4.2 3.8 20 and l e s s 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.9 No Response 0.0 4.8 0.0 2.8 T o t a l 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 75 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY POSITIONS OF AGREEMENT ON THE STATEMENT "MY JOB I S LIKE A HOBBY" Agree U n c e r t a i n D i s a g r e e No.. io No. i No. i. West Kootenay 39 39.0 14 14.0 47 47.0 Vanderhoof West 58 45.7 6 4.7 63 49.6 X 2 = 6.12 d f = 2 p < .05 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY POSITIONS OF AGREEMENT ON THE STATEMENT " I FEEL THAT -MY JOB IS NO MORE INTERESTING THAN OTHERS I COULD GET" Agree U n c e r t a i n D i s a g r e e No. • i No. i No. i West Kootenay 16 16.0 1^3 13-0 71 71.0 Vanderhoof West 40 31-5 6 4.7 81 63.8 X 2 =10.46 d f = 2 p < .01 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST SAMPLES BY POSITIONS OF AGREEMENT ON THE STATEMENT " EACH DAY OF WORK SEEMS LIKE IT WILL NEVER END" Agree U n c e r t a i n D i s a g r e e , No. i No. i No. f.. West Kootenay "8 f.O 15 15.0 77 77.0 Vanderhoof West 8 6.3 5 3-9 114 89.8 X 2 = 9.08 d f = 2 p < .05 76 PARTICIPANTS AS PROPORTION OF TOTAL RESPONDENTS SELECTING GIVEN POSITIONS ON STATEMENT "MY JOB IS LIKE A HOBBY TO ME" Agree Uncertain Di .sagree P 1 T Pr. P T • Pr.: P T ' Pr. West Kootenay 10 39 .26 2 14 .14 8 . 47 .17 Vanderhoof West 13 58 .22 • 3 6 .50 '8 63 .13 P r o p o r t i o n a l D i f f e r e n c e S i g n i f i c a n c e L e v e l of D i f f e r e n c e > .04 .10 .36 •< * .04 • > .10 PARTICIPANTS AS PROPORTION OF TOTAL RESPONDENTS SELECTING GIVEN POSITIONS ON STATEMENT " I FEEL MY JOB IS NO MORE INTERESTING THAN OTHERS I COULD GET" Agree Uncertain Disa^ ^ree P T . Pr. P T Pr. P T Pr. West Kootenay 4 16 .25 ' 4 13 . 3 1 . 12 73 .16 Vanderhoof West 9 40 .23 0 6 .00 15 81 .19 P r o p o r t i o n a l D i f f e r e n c e S i g n i f i c a n c e L e v e l of D i f f e r e n c e .02 * • 31 .03 >.10 PARTICIPANTS AS PROPORTION OF TOTAL RESPONDENTS SELECTING GIVEN POSITIONS ON,STATEMENT "EACH DAY OF WORK SEEMS LIKE IT WILL NEVER END" . • . Agree Uncertain. Disagree P T Pr. P T Pr. . P T Pr. West Kootenay 3 8 .38 3 15. .20 -14 1 7 - -.18 Vanderhoof West 2 8 .25 2 . 5 .40 20 114 .18 P r o p o r t i o n a l D i f f e r e n c e S i g n i f i c a n c e L e v e l of D i f f e r e n c e .13 X .20. * .00 >.L0 1. P i s p a r t i c i p a n t s ; T i s t o t a l ; Pr. i s . p r o p o r t i o n , and * i s where the d i f f e r e n c e i s i n v a l i d due to low numbers i n v o l v e d . 77 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY SEQUENTIAL JOB MOBILITY Mobili t y West Kootenay Vanderhoof West Scores • :  P a r t i e - Non- Partie- Non-ipants P a r t i e - ipants Partie-ipants ipants N=20 N=84 N=24 N=106 1° 30+ 10.0 0.0 4.2 0.9 20 - 29.99 0.0 2.4 . 4.2 4.7 10 - 19.99 i o . o 7.1 12.5 9.5 0.01 - 9-99 45.0 33.3 29.2 • 26.4 0.00 10.0 4.8 4.2 6.6 --.01 - (-9.99) 15.0 ,32.1 16.6 33.0 -10 - (-19.99) 5.0 6.0 8.3 3.8 -20 and less 0.0 1.2 0.0 2.8 No Score 5.0 13.1 20.8 12.3 •Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1. Respondents reporting no previous job received no scores. 78-DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY INTERGENERATION MOBILITY . Mobi l i t y West Kootenay Vanderhoof West Scores Pa r t i e - Non- Parti e - Non-ipants Pa r t i e - ipants P a r t i c -i p a n t s . ipants N=20 N=84 N=24 N=106 1° 30+ 10.0 1.2 . 20.8 0.0-20 - 29.99 0.0 3.6 12.5 5.7 10 - 19.99 20.0 3.6 8.3 10.4 . 0.01 - 9.99 20.0 30.9 12.5 25.5 0.00 0.0 10.7 4.2 9.4 -.01 - (-9.99) 45.0 47.6 29.2 36.8 -10 - (-19.99) 0.0 . 2.4 8.3 5.7 -20 and less 0.0 0.0 4.2 3.7 No -Score 1 5.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 Total • 100.0- • 100.0 100.0 100.0 1. No score was possible when respondents did not know father's occupation or were orphans. 79 DISTRIBUTION OF WEST KOOTENAY AND VANDERHOOF WEST PARTICIPANTS AND NON-PARTICIPANTS BY MOBILITY SCORES Mobi l i t y Scores West Kootenay Vanderhoof West Pa r t i c -ipants Non--P a r t i c -ipants P a r t i c -ipants Non-P a r t i c -ipants N=20 N=84 N=24 N=106 Y o * 60 + 10.0 • 0.0 4.2 0.9 20 - 59.99 10.0 9.5 20.8 10.5 10 - 19.99 20.0 3.3 4.2 6.'6 0.01- 9.99 20.0 14.3 16.7 13.2 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Q .9 -.01-(-9.99) 25.0 34.5 8.3 32.1 -10 -(-19.99) 5.0 17.9 16.7 13.2 -20 and less 0.0 2..4 3.3 7.5 No Score 1 10.0 13.1 20.8 15.1 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1. No score was available f o r respondents unable to indicate occupation of father or fo r respondents having no previous occupation. 80 APPENDIX E 8 1 R e s p o n d e n t ' s Number C.L.!. R eg i o n A.R.D.A./U.3.C./67 SOC 1 0-ECONO/A! C INTERVI EW SCHEDULE Respondent's Name Address , Record of V i s i t s : Date • Time C c i T f i . e r . t s F i r s t Second _- . . '. . Thi r d . : . _ ' - ' . . Enumerated by: ; ] F i e l d Check by: Coded by: Checked by: ; '  D i s t r i c t Lot Number, Respondent 's Location on Lot, and Land Use ( S k e t c h ) ' . 82 R e s p o n d e n t ' s Number 1,3. ' • N . T . S . Map'-Number C , L . I . Reg Ion S o c i o - e c o n o m i c s u b - r e g i o n R e g i o n a l D i s t r i c t Sex o f R e s p o n d e n t I . Ma I e 2. F e m a l e START INTERVIEW HERE 5 , 9 . IC, I 1 . 12, , How many p e o p l e a r e l i v i n g i n y o u r home at t h e p r e s e n t t i m e ? 1. Ch i I d r e n u n d e r I 4 2. . C h i I d r e n 1 4 - 2 1 3 . A d u l t s 2 . .'What i s y o u r m a r i t a l s t a t u s ? i o. 1. SIng I e 2. M a r r I e d ' 3 . W i d o w e d , d i v o r c e d , o r s e p a r a t e d 3 . What i s y o u r age? 1. 15 - 24 2 . 2 5 - 3 4 3 . 35 - 44 4 . 4 5 - 5 4 5 . 55 - 64 , 6 . 65 o r o v e r 4 . How many y e a r s o f s c h o o l i n g d i d y o u c o m p l e t e ? ! . 5 o r l e s s 2 . 6 - 7 3 . 8 •' • ' ;.< 4 . 9 - 1 1 5 . 12 6 . .13 - 15 - (1.-3 y e a r s u n i v e r s i t y ) 7 . .1.6 o r more : ( d e g r e e o r above) 16. 3 4 5 6 o 6 8 3 4. a . . D i d you have any t r a i n i n g a f t e r you l e f t s c h o o l ? I . y e s 19. 2.. n o . b . I f y e s , what w e r e you t r a i n e d i n ? 2 0 , 2 2 , 5 . How many y e a r s o f s c h o o l i n g d i d y o u r w i f e c o m p l e t e ? I. 5 o r I e s s . 2 3 . I 2 . 6 - 7 2 3 . 8 3 4-. 9 - 1 1 4 5 . 12 5 6 . 13 - 15 ( 1 - 3 y e a r s u n i v e r s i t y ) 6 7. 16 o r more ( d e g r e e o r a b o v e ) 7 a . D i d y o u r w i f e h a v e any o t h e r t r a i n i n g a f t e r she l e f t s c h o o l ? ! 1. y e s 2 4 . I 2 . no ' 2 b . . I f y e s , what was she t r a i n e d i n ? . 2 5 , 2 7 . • 6 . a . Have you t a k e n any a d u l t e d u c a t i o n c o u r s e s In t h e l a s t t h r e e y e a r s ? ( I n t e r v i e w e r e x p l a i n ) . 1. y e s 2 8 . 2 . no • * b . Was t h i s c o u r s e r e l a t e d t o y o u r Job? 1. d i d n ' t t a k e any c o u r s e s 2 9 . 2 . y e s 3 . no 7 . - How many c h i l d r e n do you have? 3 0 . Of t h o s e c h i l d r e n who h a v e l e f t s c h o o l , a . How'many c o m p l e t e d g r a d e 12? 3 ! . b . How many d i d n e t c o m p l e t e g r a d e 12? 32, 8 . How many o f y o u r c h i l d r e n h a v e moved t o a n o t h e r a r e a ? 33. 9 . What was y o u r f a t h e r ' s o c c u p a t i o n ? , 3 4 , 3 6 , 84 10. How many y e a r s o f s c h o o l d i d y o u r f a t h e r c o m p l e t e ? 1. d o n • t know 2. 5 o r I e s s 3 . 6 - 7 4. 8 5 . 9 - 1 1 6 . 1 2 . 7 . 1 3 - 1 5 ( 1 - 3 y e a r s u n i v e r s i t y ) 5 . 16 o r more ( d e g r e e o r a b o v e ) a . D i d y o u r f a t h e r have any o t h e r t r a i n i n g a f t e r he 1. d o n ' t know 2. y e s 3 . no f y e s , what was he t r a i n e d i n ? I I. Where were y o u b o r n ? 1. Th i s a r e a 2. Br i t i s h Co Iumbia 3 . C a n a d a . •' 4 . U n i t e d S t a t e s 5 . U n i t e d K i n g d o m 6 . O t h e r ( s p e c i fy) 12. How l o n g have y o u l i v e d i n t h i s a r e a ? 1. two y e a r s o r l e s s 2. 3 - 5 y e a r s 3 . 6 - 10 y e a r s 4. 1 1 - 1 6 y e a r s 5 . 1 7 - 2 0 y e a r s 6 . m o r e t h a n 20 y e a r s 7 . ent.i r e I i f e t i m e 13. Where d i d y o u l i v e b e f o r e c o m i n g t o t h i s ' a r e a ? 1. Not a p p I i c a b Ie ( l i v e d In a r e a f o r l i f e t i m e ) 2 . B r i t i s h . C o l u m b i a 3 . C a n a d a 4. U n i t e d S t a t e s 5 . Un i t e d K i ngdom 6 . O t h e r ( s p e c i f y ) „ 4 14. Now I would l i ke to ask you how far you and your family t r a v e l , In m i l es , to receive the fo l lowing se rv i ces : 1. food purchases 45,47. 2. c lo th ing purchases 48^50. 3. medical care 51,53. 4. church 54,56. 5. elementary school 57,59. 6b secondary school 60,62. 7. post o f f i c e 63,65. 8. work 66,68. Total Distance = Divided by = 6 9 , 7 1 PfstnnGfl, travel led score, 1. 0 - 5 ml les 72. 1 2. 6 - 1 0 2 3. 1 1 - 1 5 3 4. 16 - 20 4 5. 2 1 - 2 5 5 6. 26 - 30 6 7. 3 1 - 3 5 7 8. 3 6 - 4 0 8 9. 41 or more 9 15. - 28. (SEWELL SCALE, SHORT FORM) The next few Items are concerned wi th some of the things that your famtly owns. urns. 15. Construct ion of houses a . b r i c k , stucco, or frame In good condi t ion (5) 73. 5 b. unpalnted frame or other In poor condi t ion (3) 3 16. Room-person r a t i o : Number of r o o m s div ided by number of persons ' equals -ftA+tot a . below 1.00 (3) 74. 3 b. I.00 - I.99 (5) 5 c . 2.00 and up (7) 7 17. L ight ing f a c i l i t i e s : a . e l e c t r i c (8i 75. . 8 b. gas, mantle, or pressure 16) , 6 c . o i l lamps, other or none (3) 3 86 R e s p o n d e n t ' s Number START DATA CARD 2 .18. Water p i p e d i n t o .house: a . y e s (8) b . no 19. Power w a s h e r : .' (4) o 4 y e s (6) b . no 2 0 . R e f r i g e r a t i o n : , , ( 3 ) a. , m e c h a n i c a I (8) b . i ce (65 c . o t h e r o r none (.3) o 6 2 1 . R a d i o : a. b . y e s (6) no (3) 2 2 . Te I ephone". a . y e s (65 b . no (3 5 o 3 2 3 . A u t o m o b i l e ( i n c I udes p i c k u p t r u c k ) : a . y e s (6 5 b . no (2) 6 2 2 4 . ' F a m i l y t a k e s d a i l y o r . w e e k l y n e w s p a p e r : a . y e s (6) b . • no '. (3) 2 5 . . . W i f e ' s e d u c a t i o n : g r a d e s c o m p l e t e d ( S e e Q u e s t i o n #55 a . 0 t o 7 •.  (2) b . 3 " (4). c . 9 - I I (65 d . 12 (7) e . I 3 . and up (8) 6 3 o 7 6 2 6 . H u s b a n d ' s E d u c a t i o n : g r a d e s c o m p l e t e d (See Q u e s t i o n #4): 87. a.. • 0 t o 7 (3) 13. .• • . 3 b . • 8 , : (5) . . 5 c . 9 - 1 1 (6) • 6 d . 12 .. (7) 7 e . 13 and up (8) 7 2 7 . Husband a t t e n d s c h u r c h o r Sunday S c h o o l a t l e a s t o n c e • a m o n t h : '-• a . y e s (5) b . no (2) 28^ W i f e a t t e n d s c h u r c h o r Sunday S c h o o l a t l e a s t o n c e a m o n t h : 14. a . b . y e s no (5) (2) 15. T o t a l P e r c e n t a g e S c o r e % S c o r e : 16,18. 1. Under 20 - 19. ! 2. .21 - 30 2 3. 31 - :40 3 4.. . 41 - 50 • 4 5.: 5 1 - 6 0 5 6. 61 - 70 6 7. 71 - 80 ' 7 8. •81 - 90 8 9. Over 90 9 2 9 . (CHAP1N SCALE) Would y o u p l e a s e t r y t o r e c a l l t h e names o f a l l t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t y o u have b e l o n g e d t o In t h e p a s t y e a r , (Do n o t ' i n c l u d e a t t e n d a n c e a t c h u r c h ) . Name o f O r g a n i z a t i o n 2. A t t e n - j 3 . F i n a n d a n c e f e t a l con I t r i b u t i o n 4. Member | 5.. o f Comm! t | Of f i c e s , t e e h e l d 1 . £ • • '' i 3 - ' ' 4. .' 5. 6. . 7. ' s. • . J': : T o t a l ' " (XI) . j (X2)j . (X3) (X4)| . (X5) T o t a l P a r t i c i p a t i o n S c o r e 20,21. P a r t i c i p a t i o n Score 0 22. 1 - 5 ... 6 - 10 -I I - 15. 16 - 20 ' • ', ' ,21.-25 ' , ' 26 - 30 3 1 - 3 5 ;. O v e r 35 • ' • I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 o 3 0 . - 4-9. I w o u l d l i k e t o ask y o u a few q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g how you f e e ! a b o u t r u r a l l i f e and t h i s a r e a . P l e a s e g i v e y o u r r e a c t i o n t o e a c h s t a t e m e n t , ' u s i n g t h e f i v e r e s p o n s e s on t h e c a r d . 3 0 . R u r a l l i f e i s t o o I s o l a t e d and t o o l o n e s o m e . 3 1 . . S i n c e c i t y p e o p l e h a v e e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s w i t h i n e a s y r e a c h , I t h i n k t h e y h a v e an a d v a n t a g e o v e r r u r a l p e o p l e . 3 2 . T h i s a r e a i s a d e s i r a b l e one i n w h i c h t o l i v e . 3 3 . I w o u l d n o t m i n d l e a v i n g h e r e In o r d e r t o ' m a k e a s u b s t a n t i a l a d v a n c e i n my o c c u p a t i o n . 3 4 . I. do n o t want any new j o b w h i c h i n v o l v e s more r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 3 5 . I w o u l d n o t l e a v e t h i s a r e a u n d e r any c i r c u m s t a n c e s . 3 6 . L e a r n i n g a new r o u t i n e w o u l d be v e r y d i f f i c u l t f o r me. 3 7 . T h e f u t u r e o f t h i s a r e a l o o k s b r i g h t . 3 8 . I w o u l d f i n d i t v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o go t o s c h o o l t o I e a r n new skI I I s . 3 9 . T h e p e o p l e h e r e f i n d I t v e r y e a s y t o g e t t o g e t h e r on community p r o j e c t s . 4 0 . T h e r e a r e n o t enough j o b s a v a i l a b l e h e r e . 4 1 . I b e l i e v e t h e r u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t i s h e a l t h i e r t h a n t h a t o f t h e c i t y . 4 2 . I w i l l need f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n t o e n s u r e m y s e l f a d e q u a t e <-employment i n t h e f u t u r e . ' 4 3 . No one seems t o c a r e how t h i s ' a r e a l o o k s . 4 4 . I b e l i e v e t h a t p e o p l e who want new and e x c i t i n g e x p e r i e n c e s must l e a v e t h e r u r a l a r e a s and go t o t h e c i t i e s . 4 5 . I w o u l d be w i l l i n g t o g i v e up my s p a r e t i m e t o f u r t h e r my e d u c a t i o n . 4 6 . T h i s a r e a w i l l n e v e r seem l i k e home t o n e . 4 7 . The c o u n t r y o f f e r s more e n j o y m e n t o f l i v i n g t h a n does t h e c i t y . t/; o i~ CD CD >-— "O O ' . O CT> — L. CO •:; u o i c O & 0) 10 O I- l _ TJ l/> S- ( 7 ) - H -CO < 3 Q tO 48 . I have no d e s i r e t o . I earn a new trade-. 4 1 . I 2 3 4 5 C 4 9 . ' t h i n k t h a t , on t h e a v e r a g e , t h e s t a n d a r d o f l i v i n g . of r u r a l p e o p l e i s b e l o w t h a t o f o t h e r s i n C a n a d a . 4 2 . I 2 3 4 5 R T o t a l R u r a l S c o r e (R) 4 3 , 4 4 . T o t a l A r e a S c o r e (A) ; 4 5 , 4 6 . T o t a l C h a n g e S c o r e (C) 4 7 , 4 3 . ' 5 0 . What was y o u r p r i n c i p a l o c c u p a t i o n i n 1965? 4 9 , 5 i . 5 1 . Were y o u s e l f - e m p l o y e d ? -I . y e s 2 . no 5 2 . In what i n d u s t r y d i d y o u work? 5 3 . How many y e a r s had y o u been w o r k i n g fn t h i s o c c u p a t i o n ? 1. 2 o r I e s s 5 4 . 2 . 3 - 5 3 . 6 - 1 0 4 . I 1 - 1 5 5 . 1 6 - 2 0 6 . 2 1 - 2 5 7 . 26 and o v e r 5 4 . Is t h i s t h e same j o b y o u a r e w o r k i n g i n now? • I . " y e s ' • ' , . • • • • ' • 55-. 2 . no 1. a g r i c u I t u r e 5 3 . r I 2 . f o r e s t r y 2 3 . m i n i n g 3 4 . •;  s e r v i c e and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n 4 5 . s e c o n d a r y a g r i c u l t u r e 5 6 . s e c o n d a r y f o r e s t r y 6 7. r e c r e a t i o n 7 8 . c o n s t r u c t i o n 3 9 . . o t h e r . ; . 9 5 5 . If n o t : a . What j o b a r e you w o r k i n g i n now? 5 6 , 5 3 . 9 90 55> b . A r e y o u s,e! f-emp l o y e d ? I . y e s 59o I 2. no 2 c . What i n d u s t r y a r e y o u w o r k i n g i n ? 1. a g r i c u I t u r e 60. 1 2. f o r e s t r y • 2 3. m l n i ng 3 4. ' s e r v i c e , and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . 4 5.. s e c o n d a r y a g r i c u l t u r e 5 6. s e c o n d a r y f o r e s t r y 6 7. r e c r e a t i on 7 • 8 . c o n s t r u c t i o n 8 .9. ' o t h e r 9 56. D i d y o u have a s e c o n d a r y o c c u p a t i o n o r s o u r c e o f income In 1966? ( F o r f a r m e r s - P r i n c i p a l o f f - f a r m j o b ) . 1. y e s 61. I 2 . no 2 If y e s , what was y o u r s e c o n d a r y o c c u p a t i o n ? ' ' ' • - ; - 62,64. ; 57. .Were y o u s e l f - e m p l o y e d i n y o u r s e c o n d a r y o c c u p a t i o n ? 1. y e s 65. 1 2. no 2 58. In what i n d u s t r y was y o u r s e c o n d a r y o c c u p a t i o n ? ' 1. f o r e s t r y ' 66. I 2. . a g r i c u I t u r e 2 3. mi n I n g 3 4. s e r v i c e and- t r a n s p o r t a t i o n 4 5. . s e c o n d a r y a g r i c u l t u r e 5 6. s e c o n d a r y f o r e s t r y 6 7. r e c r e a t i o n 7 8. . c o n s t r u c t i o n 8 9. o t h e r . 9 59. D i d y o u h a v e a t h i r d Job i n 1966? ( F o r f a r m e r s - s e c o n d a r y o f f - f a r m j o b ) . ! . y e s 67. I 2. no 2 60. How many months d i d you work, i n 1966? ; 63. 10 91 ( F O R I N T E R V I E W E R U S E ONLY) R e s p o n d e n t may be c l a s s i f i e d a s : 1. f a r m e r o n l y 69, 2. f a r m e r p r i n c i p a l l y w i t h s e c o n d a r y o f f - f a r m j o b ' 3. n o n - f a r m e r p r i n c i p a l l y w i t h f a r m i n g as s e c o n d a r y j o b 4 . n o n - f a r m e r o n l y 5 . ho j o b o r o u t o f work 6 1 . - 6 9 . (BRAYFI ELD AND R O T H ' S . I N D E X CF JOB SATISFACTION - REVISED) I w o u l d l i k e t o f i n d o u t how y o u f e e l a b o u t y o u r j o b . P l e a s e r e p l y t o e a c h s t a t e m e n t u s i n g t h e f i v e p h r a s e s on t h i s c a r d . (Hand r e s p o n d e n t c a r d ) . 6 1 . !t\y j o b i s l i k e a hobby t o me. "70. 6 2 . I t seems t h a t my f r i e n d s a r e more i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e i r j o b s t h a n I am. 6 3 . I e n j o y my work more t h a n my l e i s u r e t i m e . 6 4 . I a n o f t e n b o r e d w i t h my j o b . 6 5 . I f e e l f a i r l y w e l l s a t I s f i e d w i t h my j o b . 6 6 . • t f e e l t h a t my j o b i s no more i n t e r e s t i n g t h a n o t h e r s I c o u I d g e t . 6 7 . I d e f ? n t t e I y d i s I i k e my w o r k . 6 8 . E a c h day o f work seems l i k e i t w i l l , n e v e r e n d . 6 9 . I f i n d r e a l e n j o y m e n t i n my w o r k . R e s p o n d e n t ' s Number 4 CD 5 CD 1_ CD Ti 0) In < -o o >- CD CD — CD — CO — i_ <„ CD CO i— p o CD IZ c •o 1.  l_ -T— ' CO '~ — < ZD Q l/j _, I D I 71. 1 . 2 3 4 5 72. 5 4 3 . 2 1 75. i 2 5 4- 5 74. 5 -4 3 2 ! 75.. 1 2. .3 5 76. 1 2 3 4 5 77. 1 2 3 4. 5 78. • r. 4 3 2 1 START DAT A CARD 3 1,3. '4. 3 f o t a I S c o r e 5,6, •'Totq.l Sea,! e Score: 9 - 12 13 - 16 17-20. 2 1 - 2 4 25 - 28 . 29 - 32 • 33 - .36 37 - 40 41 and over 7. -92 7 0 . Have y o u w o r k e d a t any j o b o t h e r t h a n t h e o n e ( s ) you a r e now w o r k i n g a t ? I . y e s . : 2 . no 7 1 . i f y e s , v / n a t s p e c i f i c j o b s have you'-'hod f o r more t h a n s i x m o n t h s : P r e v i o u s job Next P r e v i o u s j o b . ! 2 , ! 4 . Next. P r e v i o u s j o b - „ ; 1 5 , 1 7 , Next P r e v i o u s j o b . _ , 1 8 , 2 0 , Next P r e v i o u s j o b ; ' 2 1 , 2 3 7 2 . What w a s y o u r a p p r o x i m a t e - n e t ' i n c o m e f r o m y o u r p r i n c i p a l o c c u p a t i o n i n 1966? ( f o r f a r m e r s - n e t farm income) -A f r i t . 24-, 28 ' - o a e . 7 3 . What was y o u r a p p r o x i m a t e n e t income from y o u r o t h e r o c c u p a t i o n s i n 1966? ' 7 4 . D i d any o t h e r f a m i l y members l i v i n g st heme e a r n Income i n ' 1966? i f y e s , how much was a . w i f e ' b . s o n s o r d a u g h t e r s 4! . / - W T l T . C o d e . c . o t h e r s • A m . . 4 o , 3 ^ . C o d e . 5 3 . 93 R e s p o n d e n t ' s number 7 6 . ^ D i d you o r members o f y o u r fami ly r e c e i v e income from o t h e r s o u r c e s In 1966? If y e s , how much waj t h ! s income? a . r e n t , i n t e r e s t , o r d i v i d e n d s A m t . C o d e . 5 , 9 . If: b . unemployment I n s u r a n c e o r w e l f a r e payments Amt. 11,15. • C o d e . 16, 7 7 . What w o u l d you e s t i m a t e was t h e v a l u e , o f p r o d u c e r a i s e d and consumed by y o u r s e l f l a s t y e a r ? q u a n t i t y va1ue m! Ik b u t t e r eggs j meat • g a r d e n p r o d u c e T o t a l 7 8 . Have y o u been unemployed d u r i n g t h e p a s t 3 y e a r s ? ( F o r f a r m e r s - Have you s o u g h t o f f - f a r m w o r k - i n . t h e l a s t t h r e e y e a r s and been u n a b l e t o o b t a i n a n y ? ) A . 2. y e s no A m t . 1 7 , 2 ! . C o d e . - 2 2 . I 2 B . If y e s , f o r how long? 1. l e s s t h a n 2. 1 - 6 3 . 6 - 1 2 4 . 13 - 18 5 . .18 - 24 6.- 24 - 30'. 7 . .30 - 36 24, I 2 3 5 6 7 94 79.. If y o u w e r e u n e m p l o y e d , what was t h e c a u s e o r n a t u r e o f y o u r unemployment? 1. s e a s o n a l l a y o f f s 2 5 . I 2 . h e a l t h d i s a b i I i t i e s 2 3 . no work a v a i l a b l e 3 4 . work a v a l I a b l e , b u t i n s u f f i c i e n t skI I I t o g e t work 4 5 . f a m ! I y r e a s o n s 5 . 6 . s e e k i n g new p o s i t i o n 6 7. o t h e r 7 80. Would y o u l i k e t o t a k e some k i n d o f f u r t h e r e d u c a t i o n o r t r a i n i n g ? 1. y e s 26. I 2 . no ' 2 3 . • u n d e c i d e d 3 If y e s , what k i n d o f t r a i n i n g w o u l d y o u be i n t e r e s t e d i n ? 27,29. 81. Do y o u own t h i s l a n d , own p a r t and r e n t p a r t , o r r e n t i t e n t i r e l y ? I . own 3 0 . I • 2 . own m o r e t h a n h a l f and r e n t t h e r e m a i n d e r 2 3 . r e n t more t h a n h a l f and own t h e r e m a i n d e r 3 . 4-.. r e n t i t e n t i r e l y . 4 5 . manager 5 6. o t h e r ; 6 • 8 2 . How d i d y o u a c q u i r e t h i s l a n d ? I . do n o t own l a n d 3 1 . I , 2 . from t h e C r o w n - p u r c h a s e 2 . 3 . from t h e C r o w n - p r e - e m p t o r h o m e s t e a d 3 4 . b o u g h t as i s 4 5 . i n h e r i t e d as a g o i n g c o n c e r n 5 6. t h r o u g h m a r r i a g e 6 7. , p r i v a t e u n i m p r o v e d 7 8 . i n a c t i v e Improved 8 9. o t h e r 9 3 3 . How many a c r e s o f l a n d do y o u own h e r e ? A m t . 3 2 , 3 5 . C o d e . 3 6 . 95 8 4 . How many a c r e s h a v e n o t been c l e a r e d b u t a r e g r a s s .. meadows o r n a t u r e l p a s t u r e s ? A m t . 3 7 , 4 0 . '': •• \ •. C o d e . 4 1 . 8 5 . "• How many a c r e s h a v e been c l e a r e d ? Amt. 4 2 , 4 5 . C o d e . 4 6 . ' 8 6 . How many a c r e s a r e i n b u s h o r t i m b e r ? A m t . 4 7 , 5 0 . ' C o d e . 5 1 . (FOR AREAS A F F E C T E D BY FLOODING ONLY) 8 7 . Do y o u e x p e c t t o be r e l o c a t e d b e c a u s e o f f l o o d i n g f r o m dam s t o r a g e r e s e r v o i r s ? 1. y e s 5 2 . I 2 . no 2 8 8 . If s o , where do y o u e x p e c t t o be moved t o ? 5 3 , 5 7 . THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ARE TO B E . A S K E D OF FARMERS ONLY 8 9 . What i s y o u r p r i n c i p a I a g r i c u I t u r a I / p r o d u c t s o l d ? ( t h a t i s , t h e p r o d u c t from w h i c h you o b t a i n e d t h e l a r g e s t g r o s s r e v e n u e . ) A . I . d a i r y p r o d u c e ( m i l k o r c r e a m s h i p p e r ) 5 8 . I 2. b e e f 2 3. s h e e p 3 4 . o t h e r l i v e s t o c k . . 4 5 . f r u i t and v e g e t a b l e s ( I n c l u d i n g p o t a t o e s ) 5 6. o t h e r f i e l d c r o p s 6 7. mi x e d 7 8 . • wood l o t p r o d u c t s 3 9 . - eggs o r p o u l t r y .9 B . What o t h e r a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t s do y o u s e l l ? ( I f more t h a n one r e s p o n s e , c h e c k s e c o n d r e s p o n s e In B ( 2 ) . ( I ) I . d a i r y p r o d u c e 5 9 . I 4-5 6 1 o Q 1.. i r  2 . b e e f 3 . s h e e p 4 . o t h e r 1i v e s t o c k 5 . f r u i t and v e g e t a b l e s 6 , f i e l d c r o p s 7. mi xed 3 . w o o d l o t p r o d u c t s . 9 ; o t h e r 15 96 I. d a l r y p r o d u c t s 2. b e e f 3 . s h e e p 4 . o t h e r 1 i v e s t o c k 5 . f r u i t and v e g e t a b l e s 6 . f i e l d c r o p s 7. mi xed 8 . w o o d l o t p r o d u c t s 9. . o t h e r 90. What was t h e a v e r a g e number of a n i m a l s on y o u r farm l a s t y e a r ? ri?,iry Minima Is T o t a l A n i m a l U n i t s 6 1 , 6 3 , cows h e i f e r s c a I v e s Tot,--; I A n i m a ! U n i t s b u l l s ' . _. ; — . — ! . no a n i m a l s 6 4 . I 2 . l e s s t h a n 10 2 kftftf, a n i m a l s . . . 3 . 1 0 - 1 9 3 4 . 20 - 29 4 cows h e i f e r s 5 . 30 - 39 P 6. y e a r l i n g s -. A 0 " ^ . ^ 7.., 50- - 59 . 7 8.. 60 - 79 8 9 . 80 and o v e r .9 c a I v e s b u l Is h o r s e s s h e e p swi ne: . ' ch i c k e n s 9 1 . What was y o u r a p p r o x i m a t e g r o s s f a r m - i n c o m e i n 1966? A m i . 6 5 , 7 0 . . C o d e . 71 . 9 2 . Would y o u c o n s i d e r 1966 a . t y p i c a l y e a r , o r was i t . b e t t e r o r p o o r e r t h a n a v e r a g e w i t h r e s p e c t t o n e t farm Income? . . . . . I . ;" t y p i c a I 7 2 . 2. b e t t e r t h a n a v e r a g e 3 . • p o o r e r t h a n a v e r a g e '4. n o t . f a r m ! ng p r e v i o u s t o 1966 '. 9 7 9 3 . What w o u l d y o u be w i l l i n g t o pay t o own and o p e r a t e t h i s farm as a g o i n g c o n c e r n ( e v e r y t h i n g i n c l u d e d ) ? Amt. 73,78. C o d e . 79. 9 4 . Do you use h i r e d l a b o u r , f o r y o u r farm o p e r a t i o n , a n d , i f s o , on what b a s i s do y o u h i r e l a b o u r ? , 1. no h i r e d l a b o u r u s e d 80. I 2. h i r e d l a b o u r used o n l y on a s e a s o n a l b a s i s f o r l e s s t h a n one man-month 2 3 . h i r e d l a b o u r used o n l y on' a s e a s o n a l - b a s i s f o r more t h a n one man-month 3 4 . h i r e d - l a b o u r on a y e a i — r o u n d b a s i s 4-5 . seme y e a t — r o u n d l a b o u r , some s e a s o n a l 5 START DATA CARD 5 R e s p o n d e n t ' s number . • ._ 9 5 . D i d y o u work o f f y o u r farm l a s t y e a r ? i f y e s , how many weeks d i d you s p e n d w o r k i n g o f f farm? A 1. no o f f - f a r m work 5 . 1 2. 1 e s s t h a n 4 weeks 3 . 4 - 9 3 4 . 10 - 13 4-5 . 1 3 - 2 5 0 6. 26 - - 3 9 6 7. 40 - 52 7 9 6 . Do y o u use u n p a i d fami Iy Iabour In y o u r farm o p e r a t i o n ? I f y e s , how much? a . I . y e s ' 5 . 1 2. no 2 b . I . l e s s t h a n I m a n - d a y p e r month 7. I 2. 1 - 5 ' 2 3. 6 - 10 3 4 . 1 1 - 1 5 4 5 . more t h a n 15 5 9 7 . Who' i s y o u r D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r i s t ? 1. r i g h t 3 . I 2 . wrong •. . 2 3 . d o n ' t know 3 17 98 90.- Have you v i s i t e d your" D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r i s t i n h i s o f f i c e d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how many t i m e s 3? 1. None. 9 . ! 2 . j o r 2 2 ' 3 . 3 o r 4 3 4 . 5 o r more -A 9 9 . Have y o u c o n s u l t e d y o u r D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r i s t a b o u t a f a r m m a t t e r o v e r t h e t e l e p h o n e d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how many t i m e s ? i I . None - 1 0 . <! 2 . I o r 2 2 3 . 3 or 4 3 4 . 5 o r more 4 100.' D i d y o u r D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r i s t v i s i t y o u d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r a b o u t a farm m a t t e r ? If s o , how many t i m e s ? 1. N o n e . I ! . ! 2 . I o r 2 2 3 . 3 o r 4 3 4 . 5 o r more • • 4 101.. Have y o u a t t e n d e d l o c a l m e e t i n g s o r f i e l d d a y s s p o n s o r e d by t h e D i s t r i c t A g r i c u l t u r i s t d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how many? ! . None' . • ' ! 2 . I 2 . I o r 2 2 3 . 3 o r 4 4 . 5 o r more 102. D i d y o u r e a d c i r c u I a r I e t t e r s , m a i l e d a n n o u n c e m e n t s , o r buI I e t I n s on an a g r i c u l t u r e s u b j e c t d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how o f t e n ? 1. N e v e r 13. I 2 . r a r e l y . . . . . . . 2 3 . s o m e t i m e s . 3 4 . o f t e n 4 103. . Have y o u l i s t e n e d t o farm r a d i o o r t e l e v i s i o n p r o g r a m s d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how o f t e n ? 1. n e v e r : 4 . s 2. r a r e l y 2 3 . s o m e t i m e s 3 4 . o f t e n 4 18 99 104..' O l d y o u r e a d any farm newspaper a r t i c l e s d u r i n g t h e p a s t y e a r ? If s o , how o f t e n ? I . n e v e r 2. '• r a r e I y 3 . s o m e t i m e s 4 . o f t e n 105. Have you e v e r t a k e n any a g r i c u l t u r e c o u r s e s ? i f s o , where? 15. I 2 3 4 I . no c o u r s e s 2 . h i g h s c h o o l 3 . v o c a t i o n a l o r . a g r i c u I t u r e s c h o o l 4 . • a g r i c u l t u r a l c o l l e g e 5 . u n i v e r s i t y 6 . a d u l t e d u c a t i o n 16. J 2 3 4 5 5 106. D u r i n g t h e n e x t f i v e y e a r s do y o u h a v e any d e f i n i t e p l a n s t o c h a n g e y o u r f a r m i n g a c t i v i t i e s o r o p e r a t i o n s ? 1 . 2 . y e s no 17, 107. 'What k i n d o f c h a n g e ( s ) do y o u hope t o make? 2. 3. ' 4 . 5. 6 . 7. 8 . 9. L . N-. P . i n c r e a s e . farm s i z e c h a n g e e n t e r p r i s e c l e a r a n d / o r d r a i n l a n d c h a n g e b u I Id i ngs e d u c a t i o n t a k e an o f f - f a r m j o b i n c r e a s e o f f - f a r m work r e t i r e I n c r e a s e s t o c k seI I farm d e c r e a s e s t o c k d e c r e a s e , farm s i z e r e n t o u t farm d e c r e a s e o f f - f a r m work o t h e r IS. •19. 2 0 . 108. What do you t h i n k w o u l d i m p r o v e a g r i c u l t u r e i n t h i s a r e a ? P r e s e n t l a n d use (9 c o l s ) • Land c a p a b i l i t y f o r a g r i c u l t u r e (10 c o l s ) Land c a p a b i l i t y f o r f o r e s t r y ( 6 c o l s ) 21. 2 2 . 23,31 . 3 2 , 4 1 . 4 2 ^ 4 7 . 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0103930/manifest

Comment

Related Items